APPLIED  TO  CERTAIN  TERMS  IN  MU¬ 
SICAL  THEORY  THAT  SEEM  TO  THE 
WRITER  TO  BE  INCORRECTLY  USED 
OR  DEFINED. 


BY 

GEO.  F.  ROOT. 


:  :  :  PUBLISHED  BY  THE  JOHN 
CHURCH  COMPANY,  CINCINNATI, 
NEW  YORK,  CHICAGO.  :  :  ;  : 


r 


Return  this  book  on  or  before  the 
Latest  Date  stamped  below. 


University  of  Illinois  Library 


L161— H41 


DON’T 


A  FRIENDLY  ATTEMPT  TO  CORRECT,  SOME 
PREVALENT  ERRORS  IN  MUSICAL 
TERMINOLOGY. 


GEO.  F.  ROOT. 


PUBLISHED  BY 


THE  JOHN  CHURCH  COMPANY. 

Cincinnati.  New  York.  Chicago. 


Copyright,  1895,  by  The  John  Church  Co, 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2018  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign  Alternates 


https://archive.org/details/dontfriendlyatte00root_0 


c< 


DO 


The  humorous  protest  which  is  the  title  of  this  book  has  been  applied 
with  a  good  deal  of  effect  to  some  common  rhetorical  and  grammatical 
errors,  and  1  am  wondering  if  1  shall  be  thought  presuming  if  1  apply  it  to 
some  common  musical  ones. 

If  it  is  thought  that  1  am  taking  too  much  upon  myself  in  assuming  the 
right  to  utter  this  significant  word  to  my  neighbors,  1  can  only  say  that  1  take 
great  interest  in  the  subject,  and  that  there  is  great  need  that  something  be 
done.  Furthermore,  I  promise  to  welcome  every  don’t  ”  which  may  be  ap¬ 
plied  to  my  work,  and  will  give  each  a  candid  and  careful  consideration,  for  1 
am  in  entire  accord  with  what  a  great  man  means  who  says:  “With  consist¬ 
ency  an  honest  man  has  simply  nothing  to  do;  what  he  says  to-day  he  may 
see  to  be  wrong  and  unsay  to-morrow.  To  shut  his  eyes  to  the  truth  or  con¬ 
tinue  in  the  wrong  for  tlie  sake  of  being  consistent  is  the  height  of  folly.” 

What  I  am  most  anxious  for  is  an  agreement  among  musicians  as  to  exactly 
what  our  well-known  musical  terms  shall  mean  and  our  musical  signs  indi¬ 
cate,  so  that  they  shall  not  be  mixed  and  confused  in  their  meanings,  one 
with  another,  in  people’s  minds. 

It  is  plain  that  no  term  in  our  science  should  be  applied  to  two  or  more 
things  in  a  conflicting  or  confusing  way,  since  each  thing  has  its  own  name 
which  describes  it  clearly  without  conflict  or  confusion,  and  it  is  equally  plain 
that  no  musical  sign  should  be  said  to  do  what  k  does  not  do,  or  represent 
what  it  does  not  represent;  and  yet  such  is  the  loose  and  random  way  in  whicli 
statements  are  made  and  terms  applied  that  these  things  are  done  all  the  time. 

There  are  a  good  many  couples  in  our  science  that  are  in  this  danger,  and  . 
the  question  is,  is  anything  gained  by  giving  to  one  the  meaning  that  belongs 
to  the  other?.  That  much  is  lost  in  clearness  and  logical  accuracy  by  doing 
so  is  certain. 

Here  are  some  of  the  couples:  “  Measure  and  Bar,”  “Tone  and  Note,” 

“  Key  and  Scale,”  “  Time  and  Measure,”  “  Degree  and  Tone,”  “  Degree  and 

3 


4 


EXPLANATORY. 


Note/’  “  Interval  and  Tone”;  yes,  in  an  important  work  which  I  have  on 
my  list  the  term  “  interval”  is  applied  to  single  tones.  Then  there  are  sev¬ 
eral  single  terms  often  used  with  wrong  meaning,  and  some,  like  “  letters  ”  and 
“  numbers,”  are  used  that  have  no  place  in  the  science  at  all.  (While  we  do 
not  use  letters  nor  numbers,  we  do  use  some  of  their  names.) 

Corresponding  with  a  prominent  musician  in  the  East  on  his  misuse  of  ele¬ 
mentary  terms  in  an  important  work  that  he  is  publishing,  he  says:  ‘‘  1  must 
use  terms  and  langua|^e  that  will  be  understood.”  I  reply:  Would  not  ‘  the 
third  note  in  the  tliird  measure  ’  be  just  as  well  understood  as  ‘  the  third  note 
in  the  tliird  bar,’  and  ‘  the  first  tone  of  the  scale  ’  be  just  as  well  understood  as 
‘the  first  degree  of  the  scale,’  and  would  there  be  any  trouble  with  ‘tonic 
and  dominant  of  the  key,  instead  of  ‘  tonic  and  dominant  of  the  5c<7/c,’and, 
‘  what  was  the  pitch  of  that  tone  ?  ’  instead  of  ‘  what  was  the  pitch  of  that 
noie?^  and  ‘  double  measure  ’  instead  of  ‘  double  iiine,^  and  ‘  sing  the  first 
tone,’  instead  of  ‘  sing  the  first  letter  or  niimher^?^'’ 

1  then  added:  “  The  trouble  in  using  the  right  terms  would  not  be  with 
your  students,  but  with  yourself.  You  have  been  so  long  accustomed  to  this 
picturesque  way  of  applying  terms  that  to  be  exact  in  their  use  would  prob¬ 
ably  give  you  more  trouble  than  you  would  care  to  take;  but  if  prominent 
musicians  would  take  hold  and  look  into  the  matter  we  should  have  more 
hope  of  ultimate  success.” 

I  shall  criticise  his  work  in  what  follows. 

That  1  wish  my  readers  to  think  my  criticisms  reasonable  and  just  goes 
without  saying,  but  to  give  myself  the  best  chance  for  such  a  result  1  must 
make  sure,  to  begin  with,  that  we  stand  on  common  ground  in  some  im¬ 
portant  things.  First,  about  the  nature  and  limitations  of  technical  terms. 

\  -  Let  me  state  briefly  the  law  in  regard  to  them. 

hi  every  science,  art,  and  occupation  are  words  taken  from  their  common 
meanings,  so  to  speak,  and  special  or  technical  meanings  given  to  them. 
Sometimes  technical  meanings  are  similar  to  common  meanings,  but  often 
quite  different;  indeed,  some  of  our  technical  terms  have  not  a  particle  of 
their  common  meanings  in  their  true  musical  use.  “  Accidental  ”  and  “  Nat¬ 
ural  ”  are  two  of  the  most  conspicuous  terms  of  this  kind.  It  is  self-evident 
that  if  such  terms  are  thought  ot  in  music  with  their  common  meanings,  con¬ 
fusion  and  trouble  will  follow. 

It  would  be  interesting,  if  there  were  room  here,  to  go  through  our  musical 
terms  and  see  which  of  them  are  used  with  their  common  meanings,  which 
vary  more  or  less  from  their  common  meanings,  and  which  have  nothing  of 
their  common  meanings  in  the  minds  of  those  who  use  them  correctly. 

Second,  why  should  the  simple  terms  of  our  science  get  into  this  disorder 
and  stay  so^  year  after  year,  and  generation  after  generation,  when  it  is  not 


EXPLANATORY. 


5 


so  with  any  other  science  ?  First,  because,  unlike  any  other  science,  art  in 
music  is  not  only  entirely  separate  from  its  theory,  but  is  not  in  the  least  de¬ 
pendent  upon  it.  A  man  may  conduct  like  a  Thomas,  or  play  like  a  Pade¬ 
rewski,  or  sing  like  an  angel,  while  saying  “a  sharp  raises  a  note  a  half  a  tone,” 
“  with  five  lines  there  are  but  four  spaces,”  or  any  other  common  absurdity, 
llis  musical  terms,  correct  or  incorrect,  have  little  or  nothing  to  do  with  his 
performance. 

Still,  those  who  have  the  wrong  meanings  of  any  of  our  musical  terms  in 
mind  are  in  more  or  less  perplexity  and  trouble  when  tliey  have  occasion  to 
use  them  in  teaching  or  explanation,  for  they  can  not  make  the  meanings,  as 
they  understand  them,  accord  with  the  facts  of  the  science.  Therefore  a 
second  reason  for  errors  comes  in  some  cases  from  an  honest  effort,  though 
from  mistaken  premises,  to  improve  om  nomenclature,  and  the  mistaken  prem¬ 
ises  come  from  supposing  that  the  wrong  meanings  of  certain  musical  terms 
are  intended.  For  example: 

A  man  thinks  that  “natural”  in  music  is  intended  to  mean  that  one  char¬ 
acter  or  one  key  has  more  naturalness  than  another;  that  tones  not  repre¬ 
sented  by  the  aid  of  flats  or  sharps  are  more  natural,  and  that  lines  and 
spaces  without  flats  or  sharps  are  in  a  similar  condition.  He  knows  that 
meaning  is  wrong,  but  instead  of  getting  fully  hold  of  the  technical  meaning 
of  the  word  himself,  and  then  laboring  to  have  others  understand  it,  he  pro¬ 
poses  another  term.  This  has  been  done  in  the  case  of  this  word  three  times 
in  my  remembrance  of  more  than  fifty  years.  That  no  word  has  been  found 
which  answers  the  purpose  so  welt  as  “  natural  ”  I  think  1  can  show. 

A  third  reason  for  new  errors,  and  the  perpetuation  of  some  already  started, 
is  the  desire  for  novelty,  the  wish  to  say  or  do  something  new  to  attract  at¬ 
tention  and  create  interest.  1  have  nothing  to  say  against  that  desire  if  it. 
does  not  proceed  from  vanity  or  conceit.  I  believe  in  a  good  novelty;  but 
may  an  old  man  say  a  plain  word  to  those  who  are  coming  on  to  teach,  and 
perhaps  to  make  books?  Is  there  not  danger  of  beginning  too  soon  to  “  im¬ 
prove  ”  our  system  ?  Look  back.  Do  we  not  all  recall  some  things  that  we 
have  said  or  taught  or  written  musically  that  we  now  see  are  wrong  and  wish 
we  had  omitted  ?  Judge  the  present  by  the  past.  Keep  the  mind  unpreju¬ 
diced  and  open  and  you  may  find  that  some  things  that  you  are  saying  and 
doing  now  are  wrong.  If  so,  remember  that  the  progressive  man  changes 
his  mind  as  occasion  requires,  and  that  no  one  loses  in  the  estimation  of  his 
fellowmen  by  acknowledging  his  errors. 

In  regard  to  the  advent  of  new  terms  into  our  system  and  new  statements 
of  its  truths,  time  only  will  show  whether  they  have  come  to  stay.  Some 
that  all  admit  are  good  find  it  hard  to  get  a  foothold  on  account  of  the  sec¬ 
ondary  nature  of  the  subject  and  the  small  importance  which  is  attached  to  it 


6 


explanatory. 


by  musicians.  Others  that  are  not  improvements  have  perhaps  a  temporary 
success  and  then  pass  away.  It  is  light  and  knowledge  only  that  will  sift  the 
wheat  from  the  chaff  and  get  us  at  last  on  to  a  basis  where  our  science  can 
hold  up  its  head  with  other  sciences  now  more  logical  and  accurate. 

With  these  preliminary  explanations  will  my  readers  please  imagine  a 
“Don’t”  prefixed  to  each  of  the  quotations  that  here  follow?  All  will  be 
from  books  or  other  printed  utterances  of  those  who  assume  to  guide  people 
in  musical  matters.  No  authors’  names  will  be  given,  as  that  might  rouse 
antagonisms,  and  cause  some  to  feel  that  having  said  a  thing  they  must  de¬ 
fend  it,  right  or  wrong.  1  hope  all  will  see  that  my  desire  is  to  help  and  not 
antagonize,  for  that  is  certainly  my  feeling. 

The  “  Don’ts”  may  be  imagined  of  various  grades:  some  in  “  large  caps,” 
some  in  “small  caps,”  soiue  in  “  italics/’ some  in  “  lower  case,”  and  some 
in  smaller  type,  each  indicating  the  amount  of  emphasis  with  which  the 
word  is  uttered. 

G.  F.  R. 


i  c 


DON’T. 


?  9 


(from  the  writer’s  standpoint.) 

(The  objectionable  statements  are-  in  the  smaller  type,  the 
criticisms  in  the  larger.) 

No.  I.  THE  STAFF. 

The  staff  consists  of  five  lines  and  the  spaces  between  them.  Each  line  and 
space  is  called  a  degree,  making  nine  degrees,  numbered  from  lowest  to 
highest. 

When  more  than  nine  degrees  are  wanted,  short  lines  above  and  below  the 
staff  are  used,  called  added  lines. 

HOW  the  wrong  idea  of  the  staff  leads  into  contradictions ! 

According  to  the  above,  the  next  degree  above  the  fifth 
line  is  the  first  added  line.  The  space  between  those  two  lines 
is  ignored.  Does  the  staff  ever  begin  and  end  with  a  line  ? 
that  is,  is  a  line  the  first  place  on  which  a  note  can  be 
written  ? 

How  much  simpler  and  truer  is  the  idea  that  with  five 
lines  there  are  six  available  spaces,  and  if  more  are  wanted 
the  staff  is  enlarged. 

The  staff  usually  consists  of  five  lines  and  four  spaces.  Sliort  added  lines 
are  used  to  represent  tones  which  are  too  high  or  too  low  to  be  represented 
on  the  start. 


7 


8 


don’t.” 


A  very  common  saying,  and  certainly  a  true  one,  is,  that 
in  music,  by  our  system  of  notation,  a  note  means  nothing 
unless  it  is  on  a  line  or  space  of  the  staff.  How  then  can  it 
be  above  or  below  the  staff? 

The  teacher  draws  a  horizontal  line  two  or  three  feet  in  length  upon  the 
blackboard,  and  asks:  “  When  1  point  to  that  line  what  do  you  sing?  ”  The 
class  reply  by  singing  one.  He  then  draws  another  line  above  the  first,  and 
asks:  “What  do  you  see  between  tlie  two  lines?”  spaced  And  so 

he  goes  on,  until  he  gets  five  lines,  and  then  asks:  “  How  many  lines  and 
spaces  are  there  in  the  staff?  ”  “  Five  lines  and  four  spaces  ” 

Later  he  asks  how  a  tone  shall  be  represented  above  the  fifth  line,  and  the 
answer  he  gives  is:  “  the  space  above  the  staffs 

G  is  on  the  open  space  above  the  staff. 

D  is  the  first  letter  below  the  staff. 

Is  it  possible  that  anyone  can  think  that  there  are  spaces 
or  lines  on  which  notes  can  be  written  that  are  not  a  part  of 
the  staff? 

Is  it  possible  that  anyone  can  think  that  a  staff  of  any  size 
begins  and  ends  with  a  line  ? 

Would  so  important  a  thing  as  one  of  the  sharps  of  a  sig¬ 
nature  be  placed  on  a  degree  that  is  not  a  part  of  the  staff? 


"I 


and  in  the  following  musical  phrases  are  there  two  notes 
that  are  not  on  the  staff? 


— T“ 

”■  "I 

■I 

1  J  # 

cy  ^  r  " 

t  1 

>  1 1 

fm-  *}  1  ^ 

# 

S  •  r 

H  ‘ 

II 

^  j  3 

I - L 

1  ■  - 

JJ 

The  first  thing  to  notice  here  is  the  technical  or  special 
meaning  of  certain  words  when  used  in  music.  If  we  say 
'‘staff”  to  a  musician  he  does  not  think  of  an  old  man’s 
walking-stick,  but  of  the  technical  or  special  meaning  of 
that  word  as  used  in  music.  If  we  say  "space”  to  him  he 


THE  STAFF. 


9 


does  not  think  of  across  the  street  or  up  to  the  sky,  but  of 
the  technical  or  special  meaning  of  that  word  in  its  musical 
use. 

Now,  it  is  self-evident  that  the  definitions  of  music  should 
not  only  agree  with  the  usages  of  musicians,  but  should  be 
founded  upon  them,  for  actions  speak  louder  than  words — 
or  definitions.  If  musicians  use  but  four  spaces  with  five 
lines,  then  the  statement  that  the  staff  has  but  four  spaces  is 
true;  but  if  musicians  use  six  spaces  before  the  staff  is  en¬ 
larged,  that  statement  is  not  true. 

The  trouble  in  this  matter  seems  to  come  from  consider¬ 
ing  that  a  space  can  not  be  a  musical  space  unless  it  is  in¬ 
closed  by  two  lines;  but  how  thatwiew  can  be  held  in  the 
face  of  universal  usage  is  unaccountable.  Why,  the  very 
man  who  says  the  staff  has  but  four  spaces  not  only  uses 
six,  but  he  names  the  outer  spaces — one,  the  space  above 
the  fifth  line,  and  the  other  the  space  below  the  first.  How 
they  can  be  ignored  after  that,  is  inconceivable.  But  perhaps 
he  is  in  the  way  of  thinking  that  somehow  ''  space  above” 
means  above  the  staff,  in  the  sense  of  being  out  of  it — not 
belonging  to  it.  That  is  still  more  inconceivable,  for  a  ‘Mine  ” 
or  '‘space’’  is  only  such  by  virtue  of  being  a  part  of  a  staff, 
the  staff  being  a  combination  of  lines  and  spaces,  which 
combination  includes  all  that  are  being  used.  A  line  or  space 
does  not  "go  off  and  flock  alone,”  as  Lord  Dundreary  used 
to  say.  Let  me  illustrate  : 

If  a  note  were  put  upon  the  old  man’s  walking-stick  it 
would  be  on  a  staff,  but  it  would  not  be  on  the  musical  staff. 
If  a  note  were  put  above  the  staff,  thus  : 


“1 

A _ Bt _ ^  ^ _ 

m  m  1 

—  -i- 

X_ L 

L 

1 

V 

it  would  be  on  space,  but  not  on  musical  space.  It  would 
not  be  on  the  staff  at  all.  It  would  really  be  above  the  staff. 


10 


‘‘don’t.’* 

But  here  the  note  is  on  one  of  its  most  familiar  and  con¬ 
stantly  used  spaces. 


— 

r-7. - m : 

w - 

.  a. 

^ 

L 

u-rn:  - 

But  how  large  is  this  outer  space.^  Just  as  large  as  the 
inner  spaces,  and  no  larger — just  large  enough  to  write  a 
note  upon.  All  beyond  that  is  not  musical  space,  but  com¬ 
mon  space.  Some  of  that  common  space,  however,  be¬ 
comes  musical  space  as  the  staff  is  enlarged.  Every  short 
line  adds  one  of  those  outer  spaces.  There  is  a  space  above 
every  line  which  is  inseparable  from  it;  there  is  a  space  be¬ 
low  every  line  which  is  inseparable  from  it;  therefore  a  staff 
of  any  size  begins  and  ends  with  a  space,  and  not  with  a  line. 

It  seems-  to  me  if  the  friends  would  only  see  that  these 
outer  spaces,  whether  made  by  the  long  lines  or  the  short 
ones,  are  just  as  real,  just  as  simple,  just  as  good,  and  just  as 

available  as  the  inner  ones  thev  would  allow  them  to  be 

•/ 

counted  in,  and  our  difficulties  would  vanish. 

Now  about  naming  the  lines  and  spaces  (degrees)  of  the 
staff:  The  staff  is  a  variable  character  as  to  size.  It  always 
has  five  lines  and  six  spaces,  but  it  often  has  six  lines  and 
seven  spaces,  seven  lines  and  eight  spaces,  eight  lines  and 
nine  spaces,  and  so  on.  But  there  should  be  no  variable¬ 
ness  in  naming.  That  should  be  fixed,  and  not  in  the  least 
dependent  upon  the  varying  size  of  the  staff.  “First  line” 
should  always  be  as  it  now  is,  the  first  line  of  the  permanent 
staff,  or  the  first  long  line.  “First  line  above”  always  the 
first  short  line  upward  (omitting  the  word  “added”  as  super¬ 
fluous,  and  using  the  word  “above”  simply  to  show  the  di¬ 
rection  in  which  the  staff  is  being  enlarged),  “first  line  below” 
the  first  short  line  downward,  etc. ;  and  now  if  ‘  ‘  first  space  ” 
could  be  the  name  of  the  first  space  of  the  permanent  staff, 
or  the  first  long  space,  and  “  first  space  above”  could  be  the 


tHE  STAFE. 


ri 


name  of  the  first  short  space  upward,  one  of  the  objects  of 
this  agitation  would  be  accomplished. 

There  are  two  errors,  or  contradictions  between  facts 
and  definitions,  which  are  the  reasons  and  the  excuses  (if  any 
are  needed)  for  this  agitation.  One  is  saying  {our  spaces  and 
using  s\x\  the  other  is,  calling  the  second  space  of  the  per¬ 
manent  staff  the  first,  and  the  first  added  space  the  second. 
Both  these  eYrors  would  be  remedied  by  squaring  definitions 
and  statements  with  the  facts.  What  if  it  makes  some  trouble 
and  confusion  to  do  that  (no  reform  was  ever  wrought  with¬ 
out  inconvenience  to  somebody),  isn’t  it  worth  while  to  take 
some  trouble  to  make  our  science, more  logical  and  true? 

In  conversation  with  one  of  our  most  intelligent  musicians 
on  this  subject  lately,  he  said:  '‘The  common  concept  of 
musical  people  is  that  the  line  must  be  the  boundary  of  the 
staff;  that  the  space  is  too  vague  to  be  a  boundary.”  He 
smiled  as  he  gave  voice  to  this  common  error,  for  he  saw 
how  the  facts  were  against  him.  1  replied  that  if  that  strip 
of  space  just  above  the  fifth  line  was  definite  enough  to 
write  a  note  upon,  and  to  put  the  sharp  of  a  signature  upon, 
it  was  definite  enough  for  a  boundary;  at  all  events,  that  it 
was  more  definite  than  the  boundary  of  many  a  prairie 
tract  of  land  before  the  fence  was  put  up.  The  owner  finds 
his  boundary,  perhaps  with  some  trouble,  and  then  puts  his 
fence  on  it.  The  fence  does  not  make  the  boundary;  it 
was  there  before.  Just  so  with  that  strip  of  space  just  above 
the  fifth  line.  It  has  its  boundary  perfectly  well  defined 
(which  boundary  is  the  boundary  of  the  five-line  staff),  and 
when  we  wish  to  enlarge  the  staff  we  put  a  fence  on  that 
boundary,  which  fence  incloses  that  space  and  brings  in 
another  strip  of  space  which  then  becomes  the  boundary  of 
the  enlarged  staff,  for  the  law  of  this  musical  field  is  that 
there  shall  be  a  strip  of  space  outside  of  every  fence  which 
shall  belong  to  it,  and  so  be  a  part  of  the  field. 


12 


“don’t.’’ 


As  well  might  one  say  there  can  be  no  field,  or  that 
nothing  can  be  produced  by  it  unless  it  is  inclosed,  as  to  say 
there  is  no  musical  space,  or  it  can  not  represent  anything 
unless  it  is  inclosed.  The  constant  and  universal  usage  of 
musicians  disproves  that.  The  outer  spaces  of  the  staff  are 
used  just  as  the  inner  ones  are,  and,  although  uninclosed, 
they  are  never  undefined — their  “  boundary  ”  is  as  clear  as  if 
a  fence  ( line)  were  there. 

Let  this  subject  be  approached  by  a  mind  not  already 
preoccupied  by  the  common  definition,  and  the  new  view 
will  seem  not  only  simple  and  in  accordance  with  the  facts, 
but  any  other  will  seem  out  of  the  question.  Surely  no  one 
would  insist  upon  the  old  definition  because  it  has  been 
held  many  years,  or  even  because  of  its  general  acceptance. 
That  would  bar  all  progress.  1  remember  well  when  it 
was  universal  to  say  “A  sharp  raises  a  note  a  half  a  tone.” 
We  are  pretty  well  over  that  now,  but  progress  in  these 
matters  is  slow  because  they  are  not  vital  to  singing  or 
playing.  If  they  were,  they  would  be  righted  in  short 
order. 

In  regard  to  the  added  degrees  not  belonging  to  the 
staff,  this  may  help:  There  are  extant  very  old  music- 
books  in  which  the  staff  has  but  three  lines.  1  have  seen 
one.  After  a  while  it  was  found  that  three  lines  were  not 
enough,  so  they  added  another.  The  science  did  not,  how¬ 
ever,  say  “this  new  line  does  not  belong  to  the  staff — we 
will  use  it  when  we  want  it,  but  it  is  not  a  part  of  the  staff.” 
No;  it  took  a  far  simpler  way.  It  said  we  will  have  a  staff 
of  four  lines,  and  there  were  books  with  four-line  staffs.  It 
was  soon  found,  however,  that  another  line  was  wanted, 
and  again  science  did  the  obvious  and  simple  thing.  It  did 
not  say  “  we  must  have  this  line,  but  our  staff  has  had  but 
four  lines,  and  we  will  not  consider  this  line  as  a  part  of 
the  staff.”  No;  it  said  the  staff  now  has  five  lines.  And 


THE  STAFF. 


Still  the  pi'ocess  went  on.  It  was  found  that  five  lines  were 
not  enough;  but,  on  experimenting,  a  new  condition  came 
up.  It  was  found  that  more  than  five  long  lines  would  confuse 
the  eye,  so  the  enlarging  was  done  by  short  lines,  and  it 
was  soon  found  that  while  the  five  long  lines  must  always 
be  printed,  even  though  some  of  them  were  not  used,  there 
was  no  need  of  printing  the  short  lines  unless  they  were 
wanted.  Now,  what  do  science  and  analogy  say.^  “We 
need  to  enlarge  the  staff,  but  we  add  something  to  it  that 
does  not  belong  to  it  ”  ;  or  do  they  say  we  need  a  larger  staff, 
and  we  enlarge  it.^  Which  is  contradictory  and  illogical, 
and  which  is  straightforward  and  simple.^ 

When  the  staff  had  three  lines,  that  extra  line  could 
have  been  a  short  one,  printed  or  written  only  when 
needed;  or,  when  the  staff  had  four  lines,  the  fifth  could 
have  been  an  occasional  one;  but  it  was  not  necessary  then 
to  use  short  lines;  the  eye  could  locate  a  note  at  a  glance 
anywhere  on  a  four-  or  five-line  staff,  but  beyond  that  there 
would  be  trouble;  otherwise  I  am  confident  our  staff  would 
contain  more  than  five  long  lines  instead  of  our  being 
obliged  to  enlarge,  as  we  do  now,  by  short  ones. 

But  to  return.  Say  to  one  whose  opinions  are  not  fixed 
on  this  subject,  “There  is  nothing  in  the  nature  of  the 
case  that  compels  the  staff  to  have  a  certain  number  of 
lines.  It  may  have  three,  four,  five,  six,  seven,  eight,  or 
any  number;  but  in  order  to  have  as  few  lines  as  possible, 
musicians  use  the  spaces  between  the  lines  and  the  space 
just  above  the  upper  line  and  the  one  just  below  the 
lower.  With  five  lin^s  there  are  therefore  six  spaces,  which 
are  made  by  the  lines,  are  closely  connected  with  them,  and 
belong  to  them.  The  fact  that  the  outer  spaces  have  lines 
only  on  one  side  of  them  makes  no  difference  in  their  use. 
In  fact,  they  are  easier  to  recognize  than  the  inner  spaces, 
because  no  calculation  is  required  to  locate  them.  These 


M 


‘‘don’t.” 


lines  and  spaces  are  always  grouped  together,  and  form  the 
five-line,  or  permanent,  staff.  Begin  at  the  middle  line  and 
write  notes  upward,  and  when  you  have  gone  as  far  as 
you  can,  that  is,  when  you  have  placed  a  note  on  the 
highest  place  on  which  a  note  can  be  properly  written,  you 
have  reached  the  limit  of  the  staff  in  that  direction.  Begin 
at  the  middle  line  and  write  downward  as  far  as  you  can, 
and  your  last  note  will  show  you  the  limit  of  the  staff  in 
that  direction.  If  you  wish  to  write  more  notes  in  either 
direction  you  have  to  enlarge  the  staff.” 

The  above,  I  am  confident,  would  appeal  to  such  a  person 
as  I  have  described  as  less  conflicting  and  more  sensible 
than  this:  “Write  upward  from  the  middle  line,  and  when 
you  get  to  the  fifth  line,  that  is  as  far  as  you  can  go  on  the 
staff,  you  can  put  a  note  on  the  space  next  above  the  fifth 
line,  but  that  is  outside;  it  does  not  belong  with  the  others. 
You  can  not  write  the  scale  of  G  on  the  staff.  The  only 
scales  that  can  go  on  the  staff  are  E  and  F  (using  the  treble 
clef).  In  all  other  scales  some  notes  have  to  be  written  on 
something  that  is  not  the  staff.” 

How  the  clear  mind  of  a  child,  or  of  a  thoughtful  student, 
must  be  troubled  by  such  statements,  if  he  thinks  at  all.  He 
sees  that  certain  long  lines  and  spaces  are  always  there,  and 
that  others — short  ones — are  added  only  when  they  are 
wanted;  but  he  can  not  see  why  two  of  the  long  spaces  that 
are  always  with  the  long  lines  should  be  classed  and  num¬ 
bered  with  the  short  added  ones.  But  he  supposes  that  it 
must  be  right  if  the  book  and  teacher  say  so,  and  as  he 
finds  he  can  sing  just  as  well,  whether  he  says  one  thing  or 
the  other,  he  does  not  trouble  himself,  but  allows  illogical 
and  confused  thought  about  the  matter  to  stay  in  his  mind. 

I  am  often  reminded,  when  thinking  on  this  subject,  of  a 
conversation  I  once  had  with  a  dear  old  friend  who  has 
made  some  of  the  best  and  most  popular  music-books  ever 


THE  STAFF. 


*5 


published  in  this  country.  I  began:  “  \n  our  system  of 
notation  is  a  note  ever  written  on  anything  but  a  line  or  a 
space.^”  He  promptly  answered No.”  '‘Then,  whereverin 
a  piece  of  music  we  see  a  note,  there  is  a  line  or  space 
“Certainly.”  “Are  the  lines  and  spaces  on  which  notes  are 
written  all  alike  “No;  some  are  long  and  some  are  short.” 
“Have  you  any  objection  to  this  statement — 'Some  are  long 
and  permanent,  and  some  are  short  and  occasional  ”  “  No, 
Tve  no  objection  to  that,  it  is  true.”  “If  a  note  is  written  on 
the  space  just  above  the  fifth  line,  is  it  on  a  long  permanent 
space,  or  is  it  on  a  short  occasional  one?”  “Why,  a  long 
permanent  one,  of  course.”  “Well,  then,  why  not  count  it 
in  with  the  other  permanent  spaces  ?”  His  answer  was  a 
very  common  one  in  these  discussions.  It  was  to  the  effect 
that  he  would  not  change  his  views,  “for,”  he  added,  “I 
can’t  recede  from  the  stand  1  have  taken  for  years  on  this  sub¬ 
ject  in  my  books  and  teachings.”  I  did  not  quote  Emerson’s 
famous  saying  about  consistency  (see  Preface),  but  it  would 
have  been  appropriate.  ( Read  No,  ^6  in  this  connection. ) 

Let  me  say,  at  the  outset  of  these  articles,  that  “a  little 
theory  and  a  great  deal  of  practice”  should,  of  course,  be  the 
teacher’s  motto  while  at  his  work.  Much  talk  about  terms  or 
definitions,  or  theories,  then,  is  most  objectionable.  I  only 
contend  that  the  right  terms  are  as  brief,  as  easily  spoken,  and 
more  readily  understood  than  the  wrong  ones,  and  that  they 
should  be  used  where  it  is  possible  without  explanation  or 
comment.  It  is  only  where  teachers  are  conferring  together, 
as  in  this  work,  that  discussions  and  explanations  are  prof¬ 
itable. 


i6 


''don’t.” 


No.  2.  THE  STAFF  AND  PITCH  NAMES. 

The  first  seven  letters  of  the  alphabet  are  used  in  naming  the  degrees  of  the 
staff.  By  these  letters  the  absolute  pitch  of  the  tone  is  determined. 

The  arrangement  of  letters  upon  the  staff  is  determined  by  characters  called 
clefs,  of  which  three  are  used  in  this  book. 

The  sharps  and  Hats  in  the  signatures  mean  that  the  letters  upon  which  they 
are  placed  must  be  played  or  sung  sharp  or  flat.  When  there  are  two  sharps 
in  the  signature  every  F  and  C  must  be  played  or  sung  sharp,  because  the 
sharps  in  the  signature  are  upon  the  lines  and  spaces  whose  alphabetical  names 
are  F  and  C. 

WHEN  I  first  began  to  take  special  notice  of  our  musical 
terms  and  definitions  I  thought,  where  errors  in  them 
were  very  plain,  that  1  could  make  everybody  join  me  in  "a 
more  excellent  way;”  if  we  could  find  one;  but  1  soon  found 
that  when  a  teacher  was  deeply  interested  in  making  his  class 
play  or  sing  well  he  didn’t  care  much  about  the  phraseology 
in  which  he  gave  his  directions.  If  his  pupils  understood 
what  was  wanted,  and  did  the  right  thing  with  fingers  or 
voice,  he  was  satisfied,  and  so  were  they  and  their  friends — 
most  of  them. 

Now  and  then  some  critic  would  say:  "What  an  illogical 
set  these  musical  people  are,  as  to  their  theory,  using  wrong, 
sometimes  absurd,  terms,  when  the  right  ones  are  just  as 
well  known  and  just  as  easily  spoken.”  To  which  the  teacher 
might  have  responded:  "Do  not  my  pupils  read  readily 
and  play  (or  sing)  well.^”  and  the  answer  being  "yes,”  he 
might  have  added:  "Well,  what  more  do  you  want.^  Are 
not  good  music  and  a  ready  reading  of  it  the  main  things?” 
To  this  there  can  be  but  one  answer:  They  are  the  main 
things;  and  to  the  main  objects  of  our  art,  popular  attention 
will  always  be  turned. 

Then  why  trouble  about  the  wrong  use  of  terms  if  they 
do  not  interfere  with  good  singing,  or  playing,  or  composing, 
or  conducting,  and  "nobody  cares”?  Well,  an  error  is  an 


THE  STAFF  AND  PITCH  NAMES. 


17 


error,  although  it  may  be  in  a  subordinate  department  of  the 
subject,  and  there  are  people  who  do  care.  Is  it  nothing  to 
have  our  terms '  ‘  loose  ”  and  ‘  ‘  illogical,  ”  and  to  be  so  regarded 
by  scientists  in  other  departments  of  education.^ 

“Well,  give  a  specimen  of  the  errors  to  which  are  applied 
such  disagreeble  terms.”  Willingly.  .  Unfortunately  they 
are  only  too  plenty.  Perhaps  a  good  way  will  be  to  quote 
from  a  recent  lesson  by  a  member  of  one  of  our  Teachers' 
Clubs. 

The  young  man  who  was  acting  as  teacher,  standing  be¬ 
fore  the  blackboard,  pointed  to  the  first  line  of  the  Treble 
Staff  and  asked,  “  What  letter  is  this.^”  to  which  there  came 
a  prompt  answer:  “It  isn’t  a  letter  at  all;  it  is  a  line.” 

“Well,  what  letter  does  it  stand  for.^” 

“It  doesn’t  stand  for  any  letter;  it  stands  for  the  pitch  of 
a  tone.” 

“Well,  what  letter  is  the  tone.^” 

“It  isn’t  any  letter;  a  letter  and  a  tone  are  two  different 
things.  To  be  sure,  the  tone  that  the  first  line  represents  has 
the  same  name  that  a  certain  letter  has.” 

“Well,  isn’t  that  the  same  thing.^” 

In  answer,  I  hold  up  a  small  door-key  that  I  happen  to 
have  in  my  pocket,  and  ask,  “What  is  this.^”  “A  key,”  is  the 
answer. 

“Do  we  use  this  article  in  music?” 

“No.” 

“What  about  it  do  we  use?” 

“Its  name.” 

“Does  the  name  ‘ key,’ when  used  in  music,  have  any 
reference  to  this  little  brass  instrument?” 

“None  at  all.” 

“What  does  it' mean  in  music?” 

“A  family  of  tones.” 

“You  observe,  then,  first, that  this  key  which  1  hold  up 


i8 


don’t/’ 


before  you,  and  its  name  diXt  two  entirely  different  things; 
second,  that  the  name  maybe  taken  away,  so  to  speak,  from 
this  article,  and  applied  to  something  widely  different  from 
it.  So  it  is  with  letters.  A  letter  and  its  name  are  two  as 
different  things  as  a  key  and  its  name  are.  We  no  more  use 
letters  in  pitch  representations  than  we  do  brass  keys.  We 
use  the  names  of  certain  letters  to  name  things  as  different 
from  letters  as  a  'family  of  tones’  is  different  from  the  little 
instrument  with  which  you  unlock  your  door  when  you 
come  in  late  at  night,  and  do  not  wish  to  disturb  the  family.” 

When  the  smile  had  subsided,  the  young  man  turned  to 
the  board  again  and  said:  "What  should  I  have  asked 

"That  depends  upon  what  you  wanted  to  know.  If,  when 
you  pointed  to  the  first  line,  you  merely  wanted  its  name, 
that  would  be  one  thing;  if  you  wanted  to  know  what  it 
stands  for  or  represents,  that  would  be  quite  another.” 

"Well,  the  first  line  is  named  E,  any  way.” 

Here  a  smile  goes  round  the  class,  and  I  say:  "No;  if  it 
is  named  E,  put  the  Base  Clef  on  the  staff  and  it  must  be 
named  G.  Sharp,  Hat,  double  sharp,  or  double  flat  it,  and 
it  must  have  other  names.  No,  that  line  has  but  one  name, 
and  that  it  has  under  all  possible  circumstances,  with  or 
without  clef,  sharp,  flat,  natural,  or  accidental  of  any  kind.” 

"  Well,  what  has  that  line  to  do  with  the  letter  E.^” 

"Nothing.” 

"Well,  with  the  name  E,  then  }  It  seems  to  me  you  arc 
splitting  hairs.” 

"You  call  it  a  hair.^  Why,  it’s  a  good-sized  log — one 
that  will  roll  into  your  path  and  impede  your  progress  in 
a  good  many  ways.  Let  us  split  it,  then  it  won't  roll,  and 
you  can  use  its  two  sides  in  an  orderly  way.  Class,  what 
does  this  name  that  we  are  talking  about,  name  in  the  al¬ 
phabet  ?” 

‘‘A  letter/’ 


THE  STAFF  AND  PITCH  NAMES. 


19 


''Something  to  see,  or  something  to  hear?” 

“Something  to  see.” 

“What  does  this  name  name  in  music?” 

“The  pitch  of  a  tone.” 

“Something  to  see,  or  something  to  hear  ?” 

“Something  to  hear.” 

“What  connection,  then,  has  the  first  line  of  the  treble 
staff  with  the  name  that  has  given  us  so  much  trouble?” 

“The  thing  named  ‘first  line  ’  (something  to  see)  stands 
for  the  thing  named  E  (something  to  hear).” 

“That  is  it;  isn't  that  simple  enough?” 

Then  the  young  man  says:  “  1  se^;  1  ought  to  have  asked 
the  name  of  the  line,  and  then  what  it  stands  for  or  repre¬ 
sents;  but  I  am  sure  1  have  seen  in  a  Musical  Catechism 
something  like  this:  '  How  many  letters  of  the  alphabet  are 
used  to  represent  musical  tones?  Seven,  What  are  their 
names?  A,  By  C,  D,  E,  F,  and  G. '” 

“Well,  what  remark  would  you  make  on  that  statement 
now?” 

“Why,  1  see  that  lines  and  spaces,  and  not  letters,  repre¬ 
sent  the  pitches.” 

“Perhaps  the  author  meant  to  ask  how  many  and  what 
letters  of  the  alphabet  are  used  to  name  musical  tones  ?” 

“Even  then  he  would  not  be  right;  for  the  letters  them¬ 
selves  are  not  used,  at  all;  and  is  it  right  to  say 'musical 
tones'?” 

“  Well,  the  word  '  musical  ’  is  unnecessary  there.  A  tone 
is  a  musical  sound,  and  in  a  dictionary  or  catechism  every 
statement  should  be  exactly  right.” 

There  is  one  thing  that  we  have  to  do  all  the  time  in  this 
“  letter  "business  which  prevents  people  from  seeing  readily 
the  fact  that  the  letter  and  its  name  are  two  different  things. 
It  is  this :  When  we  have  occasion  to  write  or  print  the  name 
of  a  pitch  represented  by  the  first  line,  treble  staffs  we  use  a 


20 


‘‘don’t.” 


letter.  For  instance,  I  write  or  print  this  statement:  “The 
pitch  represented  by  the  first  line  of  the  treble  staff  isF.” 
There,  doesn’t  that  look  as  though  we  used  letters  in  music  * 
The  first  thought  is  “yes” ;  but  look  a  little  deeper;  that  “E,” 
so  used  above,  is  not  the  name  of  a  letter — it  has  nothing  to 
do  with  the  alphabet  or  with  language — it  is  the  name  of  a 
tone. 

When  we  write  or  print  the  name  given  to  “a  family  of 
tones”  we  do  not  have  to  use  the  brass  instrument — we 
have  the  worif  “key.”  But  in  the  other  case  we  have  no 
word,  but  have  to  take  the  letter  itself  to  name  something 
which  is  not  a  letter. 


Give  the  letter  (fixed)  names  of  the  degrees  of  the  Bass  Clef  Staff. 

Give  the  names  of  the  pitches  that  the  degrees  of  the  Base 
Staff  represent,  is  the  right  phraseology.  The  writer  of  the 
above  does  not  seem  to  see  the  distinction  between  the 
name  of  a  thing  and  its  office.  The  names  of  lines  and 
spaces  are  never  anything  but  “first,  second,  third,”  etc; 
what  they  represent  is  a  different  matter.  I  can  not  object 
to  the  word  “Bass”  for  “ Base,”  because  it  is  so  extensively 
used,  but  the  latter  name,  as  indicating  the  foundation  or 
support  of  the  harmony  seems  to  me  preferable. 

In  an  answer  which  soon  follows  the  above,  occurs  this 
phrase:  “//*  the  letter  has  been  previously  flatted.'' 

Since  letters  are  not  used,  they  can  not,  of  course,  be  flat¬ 
ted.  Lines  and  spaces  are  the  only  characters  affected  by 
sharps  and  flats.  (See  No.  14.) 

What  fixed  names  do  we  apply  do  the  degrees  of  the  staff?  The  names  of 
the  first  seven  letters  of  the  alphabet. 


The  letter  names  here  referred  to  do  not  apply  to  anything 
to  see  in  music,  but  only  to  tone  pitches,  something  to  hear. 
In  my  blind  class,  many  years  ago,  in  New  York  city,  there 
were  several  who,  when  1  touched  any  key  upon  the  piano 


THE  STAFF  AND  PITCH  NAMES. 


21 


and  called  for  the  name  of  its  pitch,  would  respond  promptly, 
‘"E,”  “D,’’  ‘"F-sharp,”  ‘‘B-flat,”  or  whatever  the  tone  might 
be.  Their  answers  were  right,  but  they  saw  nothing.  If  1 
asked:  “  What  is  the  name  of  the  sign  to  seeing  persons  of 
this  pitch  E.^”  they  would  answer  promptly:  “  First  line  of 
Treble  Staff'.”  If  1  had  asked  them  if  the  name  of  that  line 
was  F,  I  am  quite  sure  they  would  have  answered  “No, ’’for 
they  perfectly  understood  that  if  it  was  ever  named  E,  it 
would  sometimes  have  to  be  named  E-sharp,  sometimes 
E-flat,  and  sometimes  E  double-flat,  and  changing  the  clef, 
G,  or  G-sharp,  or  G-ilat,  etc. 

Observe  the  difference  between  f he  name  of  a  thing  and 
its  office.  The  office  of  the  thing  named  “first  line”  (some¬ 
thing  to  see)  is  to  stand  for  or  represent  to  the  eye  the  thing 
called  E  (something  to  hear). 

Under  the  head  of  “Absolute  Names”  this  writer  goes  on: 

As  we  Iiave  just  been  reailing  the  scale,  what  is  tlie  syllable  name  of  the 
first  line  of  the  staff?  SoL'^ 


No  line  of  the  staff  has  a  syllable  name  or  a  letter  name. 
The  only  name  that  line  has  is  given  in  the  question,  “first 
line.”  It,  the  first  line,  may  be  made  to  represent  the  tone 
“E,”sung  to  the  syllable  “Sol,”  but  the  name  of  the  line  is 
neither  E  nor  Sol. 

Every  time  we  change  the  position  of  tlie  scale  we  change  the  names  of  the 
degrees. 

Wrong.  The  names  of  lines  and  spaces  never  change,  and 
they  are  the  only  “degrees”  in  our  system  of  notation. 

What  degrees  of  the  staff  represent  the  pitch  ^^A”? 

Here  “  degrees  ”  means  a  line  and  space,  and  is  used  cor¬ 
rectly. 

In  another  place  he  speaks  of  degrees  as  having  relative 
names. 


22 


‘‘don’t.” 


There  are  no  such  things  as  relative  lines  and  spaces, 
although  they  are  constantly  made  to  represent  both  absolute 
and  relative  tone  pitches. 

Second,  it  is  as  plainly  demonstrated  that  our  musical  alphabet  of  seven  letters 
is  incomplete.  There  being  more  tones  than  letters  within  the  limits  of  one 
octave,  it  is  only  reasonable  that  there  should  be  as  many  letters  as  there  are 
tones  within  such  limits. 

There  is  no  “alphabet”  in  music.  “Alphabet”  is  the  name 
of  something  of  great  importance  in  another  science.  It  is 
not  composed  of  tones,  but  of  letters.  That  which  may  be 
said  to  correspond  in  our  science  tothe  alphabet  in  language 
has  its  own  name.  There  is  no  need  of  borrowing. 


No.  3.  DEGRHES. 


How  many  degrees  ot^pitch  did  we  sing?  T^a'o  cJec^rees. 

T1  IE  word  “  degrees  ”  has  no  place  here.  As  well  might 
one  say:  “How  many  degrees  of  length  did  we 
sing.^”  d'here  are  dillerent  lengths  in  music,  and  different 
pitches.  A  “quarter”  is  one  length,  a  “half”  is  another. 
C,  or  one,  is  one  pitch.  D,  or  two,  is  another.  “Sing  a 
quarter,  sing  a  half.”  “Sing  one,  sing  two.”  The  latter 
phraseology  is  simple,  sensible,  and  scientific;  tlie  other  is 
not. 

t'arther  on  this  error  becomes  more  apparent. 


What  degree  of  pitch  seems  to  make  the  best  ending  ? 

“What  pitch,  or  what  tone,  makes  the  best  ending.?^”  is 
the  right  question. 

Using  the  absolute  names,  what  degrees  did  we  sing? 

We  do  not  sing  degrees;  we  sing  tones.  The  word  “de¬ 
gree”  has  but  one  meaning  as  a  technical  term  in  music, 


DEGREES. 


23 


viz.:  A  line  or  space  of  the  staff.  Notes  are  not  degrees; 
tones  are  not  degrees;  lengths  are  not  degrees;  pitches  are 
not  degrees;  powers  are  not  degrees;  qualities  are  not 
degrees;  intervals  are  not  degrees.  All  those  things  have 
their  own  names,  and  it  is  worse  than  unnecessary  to  call 
them  degrees. 

What  degree  of  pitch  do  we  sing  when  G  is  the  home  tone  that  we  do 
not  sing — when  C  is  the  home  tone  ?  F-sharp. 

Why  it  should  be  “degree  of  pitch”  here,  and  “tone” 
(the  right  word)  in  another  question  near  by,  is  not  evident, 
for  both  mean  the  same  pitch,  F-sharp;  but  F-sharp  may  be, 
and  often  is,  sung  as  a  chromatic ‘tone,  when  C  is  key  tone. 
But  why  should  degree  ”  come  in  there,  when  “what 
pitch  do  we  sing,”  or  “what  tone  do  we  sing,”  is  so  unmi.s- 
takably  clear  and  direct } 

Intermediate  tones  take  their  names  from  the  names  of  the  degrees  by 
which  they  are  represented. 


No.  The  degrees  by  which  they  are  represented  'have 
no  other  names  than  “first  space,”  “first  line;”  “second 
space,”  “second  line;”  etc.  These  degrees,  by  the  aid  of 
accidentals,  represent  the  intermediate  pitches,  but  the 
pitches  do  not  take  the  names  of  the  degrees.  The  pitches 
are  named  absolutely  by  such  names  as  “C-sharp,”  **  D-flat,” 
etc.,  and  relatively  by  such  names  as  “sharp  one,”  “flat 
two,”  etc. 


First  degree  of  power,  second  degree  of  power,  lliird  degree  of  power,  etc., 
meaning  pp.,  p.,  m.,  etc. 

To  say  that  “mezzo”  is  a  degree  of  power  is  as  unneces¬ 
sary  as  to  say  that  C  is  a  degree  of  pitch,  or  a  quarter  is  a 
degree  of  length.  Mezzo  is  a  power;  C  is  a  pitch.  The 
word  “  degree  ”  is  superfluous  in  both  cases.  That  classifi¬ 
cation  of  powers  is  not  only  arbitrary,  but  lacks  the  clearness 
and  directness  of  the  usual  form.  To  say  that  “the  third 


24 


“don’t.” 


degree  of  power  is  ‘  mezzo  ’  ”  is  not  nearly  so  simple  and 
clear  as  “  a  medium  power  is  called  ‘  mezzo,’  a  loud  power 
‘  forte,’  a  soft  power  ‘  piano,’  ”  etc. 


No.  4.  BEATS  AND  MEASURES. 


We  measure  the  lengths  of  tones  by  a  division  of  time  into  equal  portions. 
The  portions  into  which  time  is  divided  are  called  measures.  Measures  are 
divided  into  smaller  portions,  called  parts  of  measures,  thus:  One,  two,  one^ 
two,  one,  two,  etc. 

E  do  not  make  measures  and  put  music  into  them. 


V  V  We  make  music,  and  it  induces  the  mental  pulsa> 
tions,  which  are  the  real  beats  of  music,  and  these  beats,  as 
they  flow,  group  themselves  into  measures.  Beats  may  be 
manifested  by  motions  of  the  hand,  or  by  counting.  The 
question  of  how  much  time  is  taken  is  not  thought  of 

A  measure  is  a  portion  of  time  represented  between  two  bars.  A  measure 
is  divided  into  parts:  “  Two-part  measure,”  Three-part  measure,”  etc.  A 
measure  is  a  combination  of  strong  and  weak  parts,  etc. 

It  takes  time  to  do  anything,  but  a  measure  is  no  more  a 
portion  of  time  than  a  scale  is. 

Here  are  the  facts  with  regard  to  measures:  When  per¬ 
sons  hear  music  that  they  comprehend,  in  other  words,  that 
is  tuneful  and  enjoyable  to  them,  they  are  conscious  of  its 
causing  something  like  regular  mental  pulsations  that  keep 
with  the  music,  and  with  which  they  are  often  inclined  to 
‘‘keep  time,”  as  the  saying  is,  by  making  motions  of  the 
head,  foot,  or  hand.  These  mental  pulsations  are  the  real 
beats  of  music.  It  is  true  the  extensions  of  the  beats  out 
into  the  hand  are  also  called  beats;  but  the  hand  no  more 
“keeps  the  time  ”  than  the  hands  of  the  watch  in  its  sense. 
We  observe  while  hearing  music  that  the  beats  are  not  all 
alike;  some  regularly  recurring  are  more  prominent  than  the 


BEATS  AND  MEASURES.  2^ 

Others;  these  are  called  accented  beats,  the  others  unac¬ 
cented  beats. 

Music  makes  its  beats  go  in  groups  by  means  of  the  regu¬ 
larly  recurring  accented  beats.  When  music  is  of  such  a 
nature  that  it  makes  its  beats  group  themselves  into  twos  (an 
accented  and  an  unaccented  beat),  it  is  said  to  be  “double 
measure”;  when  in  threes  (an  accented  followed  by  two 
unaccented  beats),  in  “triple  measure”;  and  so  on. 

Measures  are,  therefore,  “groups  of  beats.”  “Portions 
of  time  ”  would  be  a  very  unsatisfactory  description  of  what 
makes  measure;  and  “equal  portions  of  time”  would  not 
be  true,  for  in  almost  all  music  the  beats  may  in  places  be 
accelerated  or  retarded,  or  there  may  be  a  pause;  but  the 
measure  is  always  “a  group  of  beats.  ” 

Accented  and  unaccented  beats,  and  the  measures  they 
make,  whether  only  felt,  or  whether  at  the  same  time  man¬ 
ifested  by  hand  or  baton,  form  the  steady,  unchanging  foun¬ 
dation  for  all  the  rhythmic  variation  and  beauty  of  music 
caused  by  conflicting  accents,  such  as  syncopations,  etc. 

It  is  quite  true  that  the  measure  is  represented  by  the 
space  between  two  bars,  and  that  the  representation  of  the 
measure  is  also  called  a  measure. 

Those  who  may  be  inclined  to  use  the  names  “Two-part 
measure,  three-part  measure,”  etc.,  instead  of  “double, 
triple,”  etc.,  are  asked  to  consider  the  following  reasons  for 
not  doing  so :  Measures  consist  of  beats,  therefore  if  new 
names  were  wanted,  two-beat  measure,  tbree-beat  measure, 
etc.,  would  be  truer  and  better  than  “two-part”  measure, 
“three-part”  measure,  etc.  The  word  “part,”  when  con¬ 
nected  with  “measure,”  refers  to  the  space  in  book  or  on 
blackboard  that  stands  for  a  beat.  If  the  whole  space  from 
bar  to  bar  stands  for  a  measure  of  two  beats,  one  half  of  the 
space  stands  for  one  beat,  and  the  other  half  for  the  other. 
In  the  representation  of  Triple  measure  This  space  is  divided 


26 


'' don’t.” 

into  three  parts,  in  Quadruple  measure  into  four  parts,  etc. 
So  ''part  of  measure”  refers  to  representation,  and  not  to 
the  real  measure,  which  is  a  "group  of  beats.”  Of  course 
it  is  understood  that  the  representations  of  measures  are  also 
called  measures,  but  real  measures  in  music  exist,  whether 
represented  or  not.  Blind  people  appreciate  measures  just 
as  well  as  do  those  who  see,  for  they  feel  the  mental  beats, 
which,  in  their  grouping,  make  the  measures.  Some  have 
thought  that  "  double  measure  ”  was  a  wrong  term,  because 
as  double  means  two,  it  means  two  measures.  That  is  a  mis¬ 
take;  the  double  has  reference  to  the  beats;  it  means  two 
beats.  Triple  measure  means  three-beat  measure;  Quadru¬ 
ple  measure,  four-beat  measure,  etc. 

But  that  which  should  show  to  every  thoughtful  mind 
that  our  present  names  for  measures  are  best,  is  this: 

6-8  is  not  always  "six-beat”  measure;  it  often  consists 
o{  two  compound  beats;  that  is,  two  threes,  something  like 
triplets,  the  dotted  quarter  being  beat-note.  It  would  be 
clumsy  to  say  that  such  a  measure  is  "a  Compound  two- 
part  measure”;  but  "Compound  double”  is  neat  and  con¬ 
venient.  So  9-8  is  "Compound  triple,”  and  12-8  "Com¬ 
pound  quadruple.”  In  all  cases  the  compound  measures 
have  a  dotted  quarter  for  beat  note.  So,  teachers,  is  it  not 
best  to  continue  our  present  names — Double,  I'riple,  Qiiad- 
ruple,  and  Sextuple,  for  the  simple  measures,  and  Compound 
double.  Compound  triple,  and  Compound  quadruple  for  the 
'  others.^  If  not,  what  will  you  call  the  latter? 


4 


KEY  AND  SCALE. 


27 


No.  5.  key  and  scale. 


A  scale  is  in  the  key  of  the  letter  which  is  taken  as  one.  If  C  is  taken  as 
one,  or  basis  of  a  scale,  it  is  called  the  scale  or  key  of  C,  etc. 

From  the  lowest  sound  the  ear  can  distinguish  to  the  highest,  at  every  point , 
there  is  a  sound.  That  the  sounds  might  be  nmele  eivailahle,  they  were  ar¬ 
ranged  into  Scales.  The  scales  are  Major,  Minor,  and  Chromatic.  A  tune 
formed  from  a  Major  Scale  is  said  to  be  in  a  Major  Key,  and  a  tune  formed 
from  a  Minor  Scale  is  said  to  be  in  a  {Minor  Key. 


SCALE  can  not  be  in  the  key  of  a  letter,  for  no  letter  is 


/v  ever  taken  for  one  or  for  any  other  pitch  in  our  system 
of  notation,  but  we  do  not  criticise  that  point  here  (see  No. 

#  2).  It  is  using  “key  and  scale’-  as  synonymous  terms  that 
we  call  attention  to  in  this  article. 

If  the  words  “key  and  scale”  mean  the  same  thing  in 
music,  one  might  be  dropped  ;  but  they  do  not.  The  “  key  ” 
is  a  family  of  tones,  and  remains  so  in  any  possible  order  or 
combination;  but  there  is  only  one  way  that  the  tones  of  a 
key  become  a  scale.  Let  us  look  a  little  more  deeply  ifUo 
this: 

The  word  “family  ”  is  an  abstract  term.  Alone  it  does  not 
specify  particular  persons  or  tones,  but  it  gives  a  clear  idea 
of  relationship.  When  the  word  “family”  is  applied  to 
people,  even  though  no  particular  family  is  mentioned,  its 
related  members,  father,  mother,  brother,  sister,  etc.,  come 
promptly  to  the  mind.  So  when  applied  to  tones,  the  mem¬ 
bers  of  the  tone  family  come  just  as  promptly — for  harmony 
purposes,  tonic,  dominant,  sub-dominant,  etc.,  and  for  vocal 
purposes,  one,  three,  five,  do,  mi,  sol,  etc.,  all  conveying  to 
the  mind  clear  ideas  of  tone  relationship  before  any  particu¬ 
lar  key  or  tone  is  mentioned.  To  show  a  family  of  people, 
not  as  an  abstraction,  but  in  the  concrete,  as  the  scientists 
would  say,  Mr.  Jones’  or  Mr.  Brown’s  family  must  appear; 
and  to  show  a  tone  family  in  the  same  way  some  tones  must 
be  specified,  as  C,  and  the  other  members  of  the  key  of  C, 


28 


don’t,” 


or  G,  with  its  members,  or  F,  etc.,  and  to  be  manifested  they 
must  take  some  musical  form.  The  most  important  forms 
that  the  tones  of  a  key  take  for  educational  purposes  are  the 
scale,  chords,  and  their  arpeggios.  But  notice,  the  tones  of 
a  key  come  to  these  forms  already  named.  '‘Tonic,” 
“  dominant,”  “one,  three,  five,”  “do,  mi,  sol,”  etc.,  are  ap¬ 
plied  to  the  tones  of  the  key  to  begin  with,  to  describe  and 
impress  key  relationship.  Therefore  it  is  only  secondarily 
that  they  are  scale  names,  chord  names,  and  arpeggio  names. 

As  all  tone  relationships  must  be  in  a  key  when  tones  are 
used  for  tuneful  purposes,  all  interval  names  must  also  be 
there  primarily,  the  seconds  that  make  the  scale,  the  thirds, 
fourths,  etc.,  that  make  chords  and  their  arpeggios,  etc.,  but 
for  educational  purposes  it  is  convenient  to  say  “the  intervals 
of  the  scale,”  when  speaking  of  the  seconds  that  make  the 
scale,  or  “intervals  of  the  chord,”  when  dealing  with  that. 
But  to  speak  of  intervals  that  are  not  in  the  scale  as  intervals 
of  the  scale  is  altogether  incorrect.  There  are  no  thirds, 
fourths,  fifths,  etc.,  in  the  scale;  there  are  nothing  but  sec¬ 
onds  there,  and  there  are  no  chords  or  arpeggios  in  the  scale. 
The  scale  being  a  well-defined  melody  itself,  any  succession 
of  tones  that  varies  from  it  is  not  in  it,  but  all  musical  forms, 
including  the  scale  itself,  are  in  or  of  the  “  key.” 

There  is  no  more  propriety  in  saying  that  one,  three,  five 
are  tones  of  the  scale  because  they  occur  in  it,  than  to  say 
they  are  tones  of  “  Rosseau’s  Dream”  because  they  occur 
in  that  old  melody. 

The  two  words  “key”  and  “scale”  are  in  the  science. 
Why  not  give  to  each  what  belongs  to  it,  and  no  more  i 
What  is  gained  by  investing  “  scale'’  with  some  of  the  at¬ 
tributes  of  “key”.^  Surely  nothing.  All  agree  that  the 
“  key  ”  is  the  tone  family,  and  that  all  possible  tone  relation¬ 
ships  are  predicated  of  the  key — -yes,  chromatic  relationships 
included,  for  chromatic  tones  are  temporary  members  of  the 


KEY  AND  SCALE. 


29 


key,  having,  while  in  the  key,  names  that  describe  their  re¬ 
lationship,  as  ‘‘sharp  four,”  “Hat  seven,”  etc. 

In  a  diagram  in  one  work  there  are  six  musical  examples, 
the  first  headed:  “All  the  seconds  in  the  scale”;  the  second 
headed:  “  All  the  thirds  in  the  scale”;  the  third,  “All  the 
fourths  in  the  scale,”  and  so  on  up  to  “  All  the  sevenths  in 
the  scale.” 

There  are  “ninths,”  “tenths,”  “twelfths,”  and  “fif¬ 
teenths.”  Are  they  in  the  scale  ?  Just  as  much  as  all  those 
mentioned  above  are,  excepting  the  seconds.  Sing  or  play 
a  scale  and  notice  whether  you  hear  any  intervals,  excepting 
major  and  minor  seconds,  or  wrfte  it  and  look. 

The  scale  is  a  melody.  It  is  simply  one  of  the  forms  that 
the  tones  of  a  key  may  take.  You  would  not  say  that  there 
are  any  ^ds,  4ths,  etc.,  in  this: 


T=t 


— t 

0- 


0  ^-0 


I 


and  yet  there  are,  if  they  are  in  the  scale.  This  is  another 
case  where  “  scale”  is  invested  with  some  of  the  attributes 
of  “key.”  How  much  better  to  keep  clearly  and  distinctly 
to  what  each  term  means,  and  not  mix  the  two. 

Scales  are  not  compositions,  but  only  a  part  of  tlie  material  that]  is  used  in 
a  composition. 

A  key  is  not  a  composition,  but  a  scale  is.  A  scale  is  just 
as  much  a  composition  as  is  any  other  melody  made  from 
the  tones  of  the  key  in  which  it  is  written. 

Material  for  compositions  is  taken  from  the  key  and  not 
from  the  scale.  We  do  not  take  material  from  one  melody 
or  composition  to  make  another,  but  we  go  back  to  the 
reservoir  for  all  material. 

A  Dictionary  says : 

Diatonic,  a  term  applied  to  the  regular  members  of  a  scale  (or  key). 

Which  scale  There  is  a  scale,  the  regular  members  oi- 


30  ''don’t.’’ 

which  are  named  “one,”  “sharp  one,”  “two,”  “sharp 
two,”  etc.,  and,  descending,  “eight,”  “seven,”  “flat  seven,” 
etc.  To  be  sure  it  might  be  said :  “The  diatonic  scale  is 
meant,”  but  why  leave  a  loophole  for  a  misunderstanding.^ 

The  word  scale  should  not  be  used  in  this  definition. 

The  key  is  the  great  family  or  reservoir  from  which  tones 
are  taken  for  intervals,  chords,  scales,  and  all  possible  melo¬ 
dies  and  harmonies. 

The  terms  “  diatonic  ”  and  “  chromatic  ”  are  predicated  of 
the  hey — diatonic,  the  regular  members — chromatic,  the  oc¬ 
casional  members.  The  diatonic  tones  of  the  key  in  scale 
order  make  the  diatonic  scale,  and  the  diatonic  and  chro¬ 
matic  tones  of  a  key  in  a  certain  scale  order  make  the  chro¬ 
matic  scale.  Two  diatonic  tones  of  a  key  make  a  diatonic 
interval,  a  diatonic  tone  and  a  chromatic  tone  of  a  key,  or 
two  chromatic  tones,  make  a  chromatic  interval,  and  there 
are  diatonic  chords  and  chromatic  chords,  consequently 
diatonic  harmonies  and  chromatic  harmonies,  all  from  tones 
of  the  key  where  they  are  primarily  diatonic  and  chromatic. 

“What  scale  is  this  tune  in.^”  Wrong.  “With  what 
lone  of  the  scale  does  the  base  begin  Wrong.  “  With 
what  note  of  the  scale  does  the  base  begin  .^”  Worse. 
“With  what  letter  of  the  scale  does  it  begin. Still  worse. 

No.  6.  TONE  AND  NOTE. 

Tile  term  scale  is  applied  to  that  consecutive  arrangement  of  notes  by 
which  we  proceed  gradually  from  a  given  note  to  its  octave,  etc. 

(SHOULD  think  that  perhaps  he  means  notes,  and  that  he 
is  speaking  of  the  representation  of  the  scate  instead  of 
the  scale  itself,  were  it  not  for  his  concluding  sentence: 
“by  which  we  proceed  gradually,”  etc.  That  seems  to 
refer  to  giving  tones  successively  by  instrument  or  voice,  and 


TONE  AND  NOTE. 


31 

of  all  musical  studies  I  am  pretty  sure  he  would  teach  har¬ 
mony  through  the  proper  avenue,  the  ear,  and  not  through 
the  eye. 

It  is  true,  the  accomplished  musician  “hears  with  his 
eyes,”  and  “sees  with  his  ears”;  that  is,  when  he  sees 
written  or  printed  music  he  hears  it  mentally,  and  when  he 
hears  music,  if  he  cares  to,  he  can  mentally  see  the  signs 
that  would  represent  it.  But  that  is  only  done  when  mu¬ 
sical  knowledge  has  entered  the  mind  through  the  proper 
channel. 

The  scale  in  music,  that  is,  the  main  thing,  is  a  certain  se¬ 
ries  of  tones,  something  to  hear.  ’The  “consecutive  arrange¬ 
ment  of  notes”  is  but  the  sign  to  the  eye  of  the  main  thing. 

After  the  printed  representation  of  the  scale  the  teacher 
says : 

Each  one  of  the  successive  notes  of  the  scale  is  called  a  degree. 

“  Degrees”  refer  to  pitches  of  tones.* 

Notes  are  characters  of  length.  It  does  look  as  though 
notes  represented  pitches  in  the  example  given,  as  they 
gradually  rise,  but  they  do  not.  Take  away  the  staff  and 
no  pitches  are  represented,  although  the  notes  refuain ;  but 
take  the  notes  away  and  all  the  pitches  are  there  represented 
just  as  before. 

The  only  character  in  our  system  of  notation  that  repre¬ 
sents  the  pitches  of  tones  is  the  staff.  Clefs,  sharps,  flats, 
etc.,  are  staff  modifiers,  but  do  not  in  themselves  represent 
pitches.  It  is  always  a  line  or  space,  natural  or  modified, 
that  does  that.  Here,  for  example,  are  represented  the 
pitches  of  the  key  of  D  major: 


I 


But  notice,  while  all  are  represented,  as  is  proven  by  the 
fact,  that  if  any  line  or  space  is  touched,  the  musician  will 
tell  instantly  what  pitch  it  stands  for,  still  no  particular  pitch 
is  indicated  or  called  for.  Notes  do  that  while  performing 
their  special  office,  which  is  to  indicate  the  lengths  wanted. 
When  the  staff  is  prepared  for  a  key,  before  any  notes  are 
put  upon  it,  it  is  in  a  way  like  a  harp  standing  silent;  all  its 
pitches  are  latent  in  its  strings,  so  to  speak,  but  only  those 
are  called  into  action  that  are  touched.  So  with  the  staff. 
Its  lines  and  spaces  stand  representing  all  the  diatonic  pitches 
of  the  key,  but  only  those  that  are  wanted  are  noted  for  use. 

Notes  are  not  '‘degrees.”  There  are  whole  notes,  half 
notes,  quarter  notes,  etc.,  but  not  whole  degrees,  half  de¬ 
grees,  quarter  degrees,  etc.  Technically  speaking,  the  lines 
and  spaces  of  the  staff  are  the  only  “degrees”  in  music;* 
and  notice  how  perfectly  the  term  is  there  applied.  It  is 
consecutive  degrees  of  the  staff  that  represent  the  pitches  of 
the  scale  (the  notes  point  them  out).  It  is  certain  degrees 
of  the  staff  that  represent  intervals  and  chords  (the  notes 
point  them  out),  and  it  is  the  intermediate  degrees  of  the 
staff  that  are  counted  in  reckoning  intervals. 

Tones  as  to  pitch  are  sometimes  called  “degrees,”  but 
that  is  still  more  useless.  There  is  no  condition  that  a  tone 
can  be  in,  that  will  not  be  intelligently  described,  either  by 
one  of  its  relative  names,  “tonic,  dominant, — one,  three, 
five, — do,  re,  mi,  etc.,”  or  by  one  of  its  absolute  or  inde¬ 
pendent  names,  C,  D,  F-sharp,  B-flat,  etc.  (See  No.  3  for 
“  degrees.”) 


■^The  word  “degree’’  may  perhaps  sometimes  be  used  in  teaching,  with 
a  different  meaning  from  the  above,  for  the  purposes  of  explanation,  but  its 
technical  meaning  is  a  line  or  space. 


ONE  KEY  WITH  TWO  MODES. 


33 


No.  7.  ONE  KEY  WITH  TWO  MODES. 


Every  key  has  a  bright  or  Major  Mode,  and  a  dark  or  Minor  Mode;  thus 
every  key  has  two  modes.  Each  Tonic-center  is  the  center  of  two  such 
modes. 

Thus,  C  major  and  C  minor  are  not  two  distinct  keys,  but  the  two  modes 
of  one  key. 


KEY  is  a  family  of  tones  having  a  certain  membership. 


A  different  membership  constitutes  a  different  family, 
even  though  both  families  may  have  the  same  absolute  pitch 
for  key-tone.  The  keys  of  C  major  and  C  minor  are  not 
only  different  in  membership,  but  strikingly  different  in  the 
mental  effects  of  their  members,  as  used  in  tones,  chords, 
scales,  melodies,  and  harmonies.  As  well  might  one  say 
\hat  two  different  faijiilies  of  Smiths  are  but  two  modes  of 
one  family,  because  the  fathers  of  the  two  families  have  the 
same  name,  as  to  say  the  two  C  families  are  one,  because 
they  have  the  same  absolute  pitch  for  key-tone. 

This  may  not  seem,  at  the  first  thought  of  it,  to  be  a  good 
illustration,  because  in  the  musical  families  the  fathers,  and 
some  of  the  other  members  in  both,  are  the  same  individuals 
(absolute  pitches),  but  they  are  not  the  same  in  the  all-im¬ 
portant  matter  of  musical  effect.  Take  the  father,  for  in¬ 
stance  (the  key-tone) ;  approach  him  in  one  family  and  he  is 
bright,  cheery,  and  firm ;  approach  him  in  the  other,  and  he 
is,  musically,  a  different  individual ;  sad,  plaintive,  or  somber. 
(See  No.  32.) 

The  fact  that  the  dominant  of  both  keys  is  a  major  chord 
cuts  no  more  figure  than  that  both  keys  have  the  same  ab¬ 
solute  pitch  for  key-tone.  From  the  chord  of  G  major  go  to 
the  chord  of  C  major,  and  you  are  in  the  one  key.  From 
the  chord  of  G  major  go  to  the  chord  of  C  minor,  and  you 
are  in  the  other. 

“Mode’’  is  an  old-fashioned  word,  meaning  “key”  or 


34 


‘‘don’t/' 


“scale”  (where  people  understand  “scale”  to  mean  about 
the  same  thing  as  “key”).  “The  major  key  with  C  for 
key-tone,”  means  exactly  the  same  as  “the  major  mode 
with  C  for  key-tone.”  There  is  no  place  where  “mode” 
can  be  used  musically  that  a  modern  and  more  common 
word  would  not  be  better,  because  better  understood. 

The  commonly  received  view  of  this  subject,  that  is,  that 
in  music  there  are  two  kinds  of  keys  of  entirely  different 
structure  and  effect  named  major  and  minor,  seems  to  me 
much  clearer  and  more  desirable  than  the  one  proposed. 

Those  keys  which  have  the  most  tones  in  common  are  in 
the  closest  relation  to  each  other.  The  major  keys  nearest 
related  to  C  major  are  G  on  one  side  and  F  on  the  other. 
The  minor  key  nearest  to  C  major  is  A  minor,  and  there  is 
great  propriety  in  calling  it  the  relative  minor  of  C  major, 
and  C  major  the  relative  major  of  A  minor.  In  notation  both 
have  the  same  signature,  and  in  modulation  the  change 
from  one  to  the  other  is  closer  and  smoother  than  from  C 
major  (signature  natural)  to  C  minor  (signature  three  flats) 
or  to  any  other  minor  key,  or  to  any  major  key,  excepting 
those  above  mentioned. 

No.  8.  INTERVALS. 


The  distance  between  any  note  and  another  in  respect  to  their  relative  posi¬ 
tions  in  the  scale  is  termed  an  ‘‘  Interval.” 


^  ^  T  NTERVAL  ”  is  the  name  of  two  things  in  Music.  First 
1  and  most  important  it  is  the  name  of  the  musical  effect 
of  two  tones  of  different  pitch,  heard  together,  or  near 
enough  together  to  be  in  the  mind  at  the  same  time.  Play 


to  a  musician  and  ask  him  what  he  hears, 


INTERVALS. 


35 


and  he  will  tell  you  ‘‘ a  minor  third/’  Play  this 


r 

ry ' 

^  -g- 

and  ask,  and  he  will  answer  “  major  third.”  Ask  him  what 
the  general  name  for  major  and  minor  thirds,  and  for  sec¬ 
onds,  fourths,  fifths,  etc.,  is,  and  he  will  answer  '‘inter¬ 
vals.”  One  meaning  then  of  "  interval,”  by  common  usage 
and  consent,  is  a  musical  effect.  Those  who  have  thought 
of  interval  only  with  its  other  meaning,  viz.,  difference  of 
pitch  or  distance,  so  to  speak,  between  two  tones,  and  the 
distance  or  space  on  the  staff  between  the  two  notes  that 
represent  it,  may  hesitate  about  precepting  the  first  definition. 
To  such  I  would  say,  that  our  first  authority  for  it  is  the  uni¬ 
versal  usage  of  musicians.  All  agree  that  we  can  hear  sec¬ 
onds,  thirds,  fourths,  etc.,  and  that  they  are  intervals.  The 
second  is  the  law  governing  technical  terms. 

Any  science,  art,  or  occupation  mpiy  take  words  from 
their  common  meanings,  so  to  speak,  and  give  them  special 
meanings,  different  from  their  common  meanings.  They 
then  become  technical  terms.  Our  nomenclature  is  full  of 
them.  The  common  meaning  of  "accidental”  is  "by  acci¬ 
dent.”  There  is  not  a  particle  of  that  meaning  in  its  musicpil 
use.  The  musical  word  "natural”  has  no  reference  what¬ 
ever  to  "naturalness,”  or  "according  to  npiture,”  but  refers 
simply  and  wholly  to  pitch,  as  do  "  sharp  ”  and  "  flat.’’ 

So  "  Interval,”  as  something  to  hear,  is  no  farther  removed 
from  its  common  meaning  than  are  many  other  technical 
terms. 

But  one  of  its  musical  meanings  is  its  common  meaning. 
Briefly  stpited,  the  whole  matter  is  thus: 

The  first  meaning  of  interval  is  the  musical  effect  of  two 
tones — emotional.  The  second  is  the  difference  of  pitch  or 
space,  or  distance  between  the  two  tones  or  their  represen¬ 
tation — matters  of  calculation — intellectual.  The  first  mean¬ 
ing  is  described  by  the  terms  seconds,  thirds,  major,  minor, 


perfect,  augmented,  diminished,  diatonic,  chromatic,  etc. 
The  second  by  the  terms  “half-step,”  “step,”  and  “step- 
and-a-half.”* 

We  do  not  hear  steps  and  half-steps,  for  they  describe  the 
space,  or  distance,  or,  as  Mr.  Mathews  says,  the  “hole” 
between  the  tones.  1  think  there  is  no  place  where  one 
could  talk  about  hearing  a  step  that  “  major  second”  would 
not  be  more  orderly,  and  more  in  accordance  with  the  usage 
of  musicians  as  the  name  of  what  is  heard,  and  for  “dia¬ 
tonic  half-step,'’  “minor  second  ”  would  always  be  in  order. 
The  only  question  would  be  about  “chromatic  half-step.” 
Surely  there  must  be  a  name  for  the  musical  effect  of  C  and 
C-sharp,  that  does  not  require  the  use  of  the  word  half-step. 
“  Half-step  ”  measures  the  difference  of  pitch  between  the 
two  tones,  but  is  not  a  proper  name  for  the  musical  effect  of 
the  two.  If  1  am  not  mistaken,  that  interval  is  called  “  aug¬ 
mented  prime”  by  some  harmonists,  and  “chromatic  inter¬ 
val”  by  others.  Would  not  “chromatic  interval”  answer 
always,  since  all  other  chromatic  intervals  can  be  described 
by  their  other  names,  as  “augmented  second,”  “diminished 
fifth,”  etc.,  whenever  they  occur  as  chromatic  intervals  } 

The  degrees  of  the  scale  do  not  all  include  the  same  measure  of  space;  for 
example,  the  interval  between  E  and  F,  and  B  and  C,  is  only  half  the  interval 
between  C  and  D,  etc. 

I  think  that  statement  would  puzzle  any  learner  not  already 
pretty  well  posted  on  the  subject.  The  most  obvious  mean¬ 
ing  of  “  the  same  measure  of  space*’  would  surely  be  the 
distance  on  the  staff  from  one  note  of  the  interval  to  the 
other.  As  the  example  is  given,  the  notes  that  represent  the 
minor  seconds  are  the  same  distance  apart  as  the  others. 


*The  ‘‘  step-and-a-half  ” — a  compound  word,  is  one  interval — the  measure 
of  the  “  augmented  second,”  in  distinction  from  step  ”  and  half-step,” — 
two  intervals,  which  is  the  measure  of  the  minor  third. 


INTERVALS. 


31 


''  Is  only  half  the  interval  ”  may  not  be  misunderstood,  but 
that  with  the  whole  sentence  seems  to  me  an  unfortunate 
way  to  state  what  is  meant,  which  I  suppose  to  be  this: 

The  intervals  of  the  scale  are  not  all  alike  in  size.  Those 
made  by  E  and  F  and  B  and  C  are  but  half  as  large  as  those 
made  by  C  and  D,  etc.,  or,  the  difference  of  pitch  between 
E  and  F  is  but  half  as  great  as  that  between  C  and  D,  al¬ 
though  the  distance  on  the  staff  between  the  notes  of  the 
smaller  intervals  is  the  same  as  that  between  the  notes  of 
the  larger  ones. 

But  is  that  the  orderly  way  to  begin  this  subject  ?  I  think 

♦ 

not.  According  to  Pestalozzi,  and  all  the  great  educators, 
the  first  watchword  is,  “the  thing  first,  then  the  sign”;  and 
another  is,  “tell  the  pupil  nothing  that  he  can  find  out  him¬ 
self.”  According  to  that  the  pupil  should  bear  major  and 
minor  seconds  until  he  knows  the  difference  between  the 
two,  and  can  tell  either  the  moment  he  hears  it,  a  thing  per¬ 
fectly  simple  and  sure  with  everyone  who  has  any  ear  for 
music  at  all,  and  is  far  enough  along  to  commence  this  study. 
Then  the  seconds  of  the  scale  are  examined,  and  the  pupil 
finds  out  himself  that  E  and  F  and  B  and  C  are  smaller  in¬ 
tervals  than  the  others.  Then  come  names  and  representa¬ 
tions. 

The  former  are  called  half-step^  and  the  latter  sieps^  termed  by  some  au¬ 
thors  semi-lories  and  lories  or  minor'  seconds  and  major'  seconds. 

Here  “  half-steps”  and  “minor  seconds”  are  regarded  as 
meaning  the  same  thing,  and  so  “steps”  and  “major  sec¬ 
onds.” 

Steps  and  half-steps  are  no  more  to  be  compared  with 
major  and  minor  seconds,  and  other  musical  effects,  than  the 
tape  measure  which  gives  you  the  dimensions  of  a  beautiful 
statue  is  to  be  considered  in  comparison  with  the  statue  it¬ 
self;  and,  besides  that,  “half-step  ”  and  “  minor  second”  can 


38 


‘'don’t/' 

not  be  synonymous  terms.  It  is  a  half-step  from  C  to 
C-sharp,  but  those  tones  do  not  make  a  minor  second. 


No.  9.  NATURAL  AND  CANCEL. 

What  characters  are  used  to  indicate  intermediate  tones?  Sharps,  flats  and 
cancels. 

IN  a  note  which  follows  this  question  and  answer  is  the 
following : 


If  a  name  can  be  given  a  character  that  will  fully  define  it  and  properly  con¬ 
vey  its  meaning  at  all  times,  as  “  Hold,”  Tie,”  etc.,  do,  it  seems  to  us  the 
better  way.  This  character  (  ^  )  always  means  to  cancel  the  work  or  effect 
of  something. 

A  natural  cancels  the  effect  of  the  sharp  or  flat  that  has  been  written  on 
that  degree. 


Passing  by  the  imperfectness  of  the  question  1  will  con¬ 
fine  myself  to  the  word  “cancel.”  1  will  try  to  show  that 
its  common  meaning,  as  applied  to  the  action  of  the  char¬ 
acter  in  question,  is  totally  wrong,  and  that  it  can  not  be  a 
substitute  for  the  word  “natural.”  I  will  also  show  that 
“natural”  “sharp,”  and  “tlat”  act  alike  —  each  simply 
changing  the  meaning  of  a  line  or  space  a  half-step. 

That  my  criticisms  may  be  seen  to  be  just,  the  following 
statements  (which  1  think  no  musician  will  dispute)  must 
first  be  seen  to  be  true. 

Sharps,  Hats,  and  naturals  belong  to  lines  and  spaces,  and 
not  to  notes.  When  the  staff  is  prepared  by  clef  and  sig¬ 
nature  to  represent  a  key,  its  lines  and  spaces  show  the 
pitches  of  that  key  before  a  note  is  placed  upon  them. 

The  regular  members  of  a  key  are  called  diatonic  tones. 
The  occasional  or  temporary  members  that  may  come  into 
it  are  called  chromatic  tones.  Diatonic  tones  are  shown  in 
the  signature  place — a  little  section  of  the  staff  just  at  the 


NATURAL  AND  CANCLL. 


39 


right  of  the  clef.  Chromatic  tones  are  represented  by  acci¬ 
dentals,  which  are  simply  sharps,  flats,  naturals,  etc.,  else- 
cohere  than  in  the  signature  place. 

When  a  staff  is  prepared  for  a  key  its  lines  and  spaces 
are  always  in  one  of  live  conditions,  viz.  :  natural,  sharped, 
Hatted,  double  sharped  or  double  Hatted,  and  here  is  a 
point  in  thorough  instruction  where  the  word  “cancel’’ 
can  not  be  a  substitute  for  the  word  “natural.”  One  leord 
must  be  used.  No  science  would  allow  a  sentence  there, 
like  “No  sharp  or  Hat  upon  it,”  or,  “nothing  but  the  clef 
upon  it.”  The  meaning  to  be,  conveyed  would  be  crystal¬ 
lized  into  one  technical  term.  I'hat  was  done  generations 
ago,  and  it  is  a  perfectly  good  word  if  you  keep  its  common 
meaning  out  of  the  way. 

The  terms  sharp.  Hat,  natural,  etc.,  refer  to  pitch  and 
nothing  else,  and  the  pitch  meaning  in  the  term  “natural” 
is  just  as  real  as  it  is  in  either  of  the  others.  To  think  of 
naturalness  in  connection  with  “  natural  ”  in  music,  is  as 
absurd  as  it  would  be  to  think  of  something  pointed  or 
cutting  with  “sharp,”  or  of  something  stupid  or  dull  with 
“Hat.”  It  is  having  the  common  meaning  of  natural  in 
mind  that  makes  all  the  trouble  with  the  word. 

Notes  call  into  action  the  lines  and  spaces  that  are  wanted. 
Some  lines  and  spaces  perhaps  are  not  wanted  at  all  during 
the  performance  of  a  piece,  but,  as  indicated  by  the  signature, 
they  stand  there  representing  their  pitches  all  through,  just 
the  same. 

But  an  accidental  is  never  used  unless  a  line  or  space  is  to 
be  called  into  action  by  a  note,  so  a  note  is  always  with  the 
accidental,  and  it  appears  to  a  superllcial  observer  as  if  the 
]iote  were  sharped  or  Hatted,  but  that  is  a  false  appearance. 
It  is  the  line  or  space  whose  meaning  is  changed,  and  not  the 
note.  It  makes  no  difference  what  kind  of  a  note  is  used. 

If  the  above  seems  true  to  my  readers  we  are  ready  to 


40 


''don’t.” 


begin  the  investigation.  Here  is  precisely  the  same  musical 
phrase  in  two  keys: 


V  H— — H 

1  - 

1 

1 

i 

— ffWf  /i  ~  ^  M 

M 

^  U  L. 

•  — 

M  ,  -i.. - 1 - 1 

Fi  ve  five  five  j;|five  six  five  three  five^four  four  three  three  two  one. 
Sol  sol  sol  si  la  sol  mi  sol  fi  fa  mi  mi  re  do. 


— t— 

- 1 

-e - 0 - ^ 

^  .-g= 

Five  five  five  ^five  six  five  three  five 
Sol  sol  sol  si  la  sol  mi  sol  fi  fa  mi  mi  re  do. 

Look  at  the  first  measure  of  the  first  example.  You 
would  not  say  that  the  sharp  cancels  anything  there.  No; 
you  would  say  there  is  no  character  on  that  line  to  cancel. 
Well,  look  at  the  second  example.  You  would  not  say  the 
cancel  cancels  the  flat,  for  what  does  “cancel”  mean  — 
“Annul,”  “  efface,”  “  destroy,”  etc.,  and  the  flat  is  not 
effaced— it  is  there..  No;  you  say  it  is  the  ejfect  of  the  flat 
that  is  canceled.  Well,  what  is  the  effect  of  the  flat 
What  does  it  do }  It  makes  that  line  stand  for  B-flat, 
does  it  not }  If  so,  it  must  be  the  musical  effect  called 
B-flat  that  you  think  is  canceled.  Is  not  G  in  the  first 
example  a  musical  effect  as  much  as  B-flat  in  the  second  } 
Is  it  not  exactly  the  same  thing  in  the  key  of  C  that  B-flat 
is  in  the  key  of  E-flat,  and  is  either  effect  canceled  ?  Does 
not  each  continue  just  as  long  as  it  is  wanted  }  Certainly 
if  B-flat  or  five  is  canceled  in  the  second  example  when  a 
new  pitch  is  introduced,  G  or  five  in  the  first  is  canceled 
when  the  G-sharp  appears.  Perhaps  the  principle  will  be 
more  clearly  seen  if  you  look  in  the  third  measure.  If  the 
natural  in  the  first  key  cancels  the  effect  of  the  sharp  which 
precedes  it,  the  fiat  in  the  second  cancels  the  effect  of  the 
natural,  for  they  are  absolutely  the  same  in  musical  effect, 
and,  of  course,  in  their  syllables  and  relative  names.  Here 


|||four  four  three  three  two  one. 


NATURAL  AND  CANCEL.  4 1 

the  natural  in  the  first  key  acts  like  a  fiat,  and  the  proof  is 
that  a  flat  in  the  second  does  exactly  the  same  thing. 

How  much  more  complicated  the  idea  of  canceling  here 
is  than  the  simple  truth,  which  is,  that  the  natural  acts  like 
a  sharp  in  the  first  measure  and  like  a  flat  in  the  third;  but 
let  me  come  to  that  in  a  more  careful  way. 

In  the  first  example  the  musical  effect  G  starts  in  the 
signature  place  and  runs  along  the  line,  so  to  speak,  until  it 
comes  to  the  sharp.  There  the  G  or  five  effect  stops  and  a 
new  effect  commences  named  sharp  five.  This  effect  has 
but  a  short  distance  to  run ;  it  stops  at  the  bar,  after  which 
the  five  is  resumed.  1  might  say,  in  passing,  that  if  stop¬ 
ping  one  musical  effect  and  introducing  another  \s>  canceling, 
the  bar  is  as  good  a  cancel  as  the  sharp  or  natural,  for  in 
those  two  respects  it  does  just  what  the  accidentals  do. 

In  the  second  staff  the  B-flat  effect,  which  is  five  in  this 
key,  starts  in  the  signature  place  and  runs  along  in  the  same 
way  until  it  comes  to  the  natural.  Here  the  five  effect 
stops  and  the  new  effect  .named  sharp  five  commences. 
This  in  turn  is  stopped  by  the  next  bar.  In  both  cases  the 
same  process  of  mind  and  of  voice  is  gone  through  with, 
and  the  same  five,  five,  five,  sharp  five,”  the  same  syllables 
and  the  same  musical  effect  to  the  ear.  The  natural  here  is 
practically  a  sharp.  ‘'Why  not  use  a  sharp  then?”  does 
someone  ask  ?  Because  a  wise  musical  law  says,  that  to 
avoid  confusion  and  misunderstanding  a  flatted  degree  of 
the  staff  must  be  sharped  by  a  natural,  and  that  a  sharped 
degree  must  be  flatted  by  the  same  sign. 

The  simple  and  true  view  of  this  character  is  that  it  is  a 
device  to  sharp  where  a  sharp  will  not  do,  and  to  flat  where 
a  flat  is  not  allowed.  Whatever  other  function  this  character 
has,  is  shared  by  the  other  accidentals,  for  there  is  nothing 
that  the  natural  can  do  in  one  key  that  the  sharp  or 
flat  can  not  .do,  producing  exactly  the  same  .  result,  in 
another  key,  and  vice  versa. 


42 


''don’t/' 

Now  look  at  the  first  key  again.  The  musical  effect 
named  F  or  four  in  this  key  starts  in  the  signature  place 
and  runs  into  the  third  measure  before  it  is  stopped.  To  be 
sure,  that  space  has  not  been  called  into  action,  but  it  has 
been  representing  F  or  four  all  the  time.  Now  the  four 
effect  ceases  and  the  sharp  four  effect  comes  in,  but  its  sway 
is  short.  At  the  next  beat  it  comes  to  a  character  which  is 
appointed  Xo  flat  that  degree  back  to  where  it  was. 

Now  look  at  the  second  example.  The  musical  effect 
named  A-llat  (four  in  this  key)  starts  in  the  signature  place 
and  runs  in  the  same  way  into  the  third  measure  before  it 
is  stopped.  There  the  proper  character  sharps  that  degree 
and  introduces  sharp  four  for  one  beat,  then  the  proper 
character  fats  that  degree  back  to  where  it  was  before, 
just  what  the  sharp  does  in  the  first  key  the  natural  does  in 
the  second,  and  just  what  the  natural  does  in  the  first  key 
the  flat  does  in  the  second.  As  before,  we  go  through  the 
same  process  of  mind  and  voice  for  both,  and  have  the 
same  syllables,  the  same  relative  names,  and  the  same 
musical  effect  to  the  ear. 

Now  about  the  common  meaning  of  "cancel.”  All  know 
what  it  is.  Let  us  see  if  it  can  be  applied  in  music.  Are 
any  tones,  or  notes,  or  flats,  or  sharps,  or  their  effects  an¬ 
nulled  or  effaced  when  the  new  pitch  comes  in  }  No;  all 
that  has  gone  before,  stays.  Every  character  and  every  ef¬ 
fect  is  just  as  much  wanted  as  the  new  pitch  is.  By  no 
stretch  of  the  imagination  can  "cancel”  mean  keeping  an 
effect  as  long  as  it  is  wanted,  and  then  introducing  a  new 
one.  If  so,  that  operation  takes  place  whenever  an  acci¬ 
dental  occurs,  and  at  every  bar  where  the  effect  of  an  ac¬ 
cidental  is  stopped  and  a  line  or  space  resumes  its  diatonic 
condition.  Will  not  this  illustration  be  of  use  here  } 

You  are  writing  a  letter;  you  look  back  and  see  a  line  that 
you  do  not  want;  you  draw  your  pen  through  it;  you  have 


NATURAL  AND  CANCEL. 


43 


canceled  it;  it  is  annulled,  or  effaced.  But  instead  of  that, 
if  the  line  or  sentence  is  just  what  you  do  want,  and  at  its 
close  you  proceed  to  write  something  else,  you  have  not 
canceled  anything.  That  is  just  our  musical  case. 

Another  objection  to  ''cancel  ”  is  that  it  looks  backward. 
Notice  that  every  accidental  indicates  a  coming  pitch,  and 
that  when  a  musician  comes  to  one  he  looks  forward  to  see 
what  it  calls  for.  He  gives  his  whole  attention  to  that.  He 
has  no  occasion  to  look  backward;  the  key,  and  the  pre¬ 
vious  conditions  just  passed  over,  are  in  his  mind,  half  un¬ 
consciously  perhaps,  but  he  does  not  have  to  give  them  any 
attention.  If  a  person  is  not'  far  enough  along  in  music  to 
know  where  he  is  and  what  has  just  gone  before,  his  men¬ 
tal  condition  would  have  no  value  as  authority  on  this  sub¬ 
ject;  or,  if  he  has  such  a  belief  in  "cancel,”  that  whenever 
the  natural  occurs  he  feels  that  he  must  look  back  and  see 
what  is  to  be  annulled  or  effaced,  he  also  would  be  no  au¬ 
thority  as  to  what  musicians  usually  do.  Is  it  not  seen  that 
to  regard  the  natural  as  different  in  its  action  from  the  other 
accidentals,  that  with  it  there  is  a  looking  back  and  undoing- 
something  that  the  others  do  not  do,  is  not  only  not  true, 
but  far  more  complicated  and  confusing  than  the  simple 
truth  that  all  accidentals  act  on  the  same  general  principle, 
that  each  one  simply  sharps  or  flats  the  line  or  space  that  it 
is  on,  and  so  indicates  a  coming  pitch?  One  more  import¬ 
ant  point:  The  teacher  who  wishes  his  pupils  to  be  intelli¬ 
gent  on  the  subject  of  diatonic  and  chromatic  tones  must 
sometimes  question  them  about  the  condition  of  the  lines 
and  spaces  of  the  staff,  for  the  lines  and  spaces  of  the  staff, 
either  natural  or  sharped,  or  flatted,  are  the  only  representa¬ 
tives  of  pitches  in  our  system.  When  the  staff  is  prepared 
for  a  key,  as  has  been  said,  the  diatonic  tones  or  regular 
members  of  the  key  are  shown  in  the  signature  place,  and 
whatever  condition  a  line  or  space  there  is  in,  may  be  called 


44 


‘^don’t.” 


its  diatonic  condition.  It  is  a  rule  that  any  line  or  space  may 
be  sharped  or  flatted  from  its  diatonic  condition,  to  indicate 
a  chromatic  tone.  If  the  diatonic  condition  of  th^  line  or 
space  is  natural,  a  sharp  sharps  it  or  a  flat  flats  it.  If  in 
the  signature  place  it  is  sharped,  making  that  its  diatonic 
condition,  a  double  sharp  sharps  it,  ora  natural  flats  it.  If  it  is 
Hatted  in  the  signature,  a  natural  sharps  it,  or  a  double-flat 
flats  it. 

This  important  instruction  can  not  go  on  without  a  tech¬ 
nical  term  for  every  diatonic  condition  that  a  line  or  space  may 
be  in.  You  point,  for  instance,  to  the  second  line  of  the 
treble  staff  when  it  is  prepared  for  the  key  of  F-sharp  ma¬ 
jor,  and  ask,  '‘What  is  the  diatonic  condition  of  this  line  in 
this  key?”  The  answer  will  be,  "  It  is  sharped.”  "How 
would  you  sharp  it  again?”  "By  a  double  sharp.”  "  How 
would  you  flat  it ? ”  "By  a  natural.”  Then  you  point  to 
the  third  line  of  the  treble  staff,  when  it  is  prepared  for  the 
key  of  A-flat  major,  and  ask,  "What  is  the  diatonic  condi¬ 
tion  of  this  line  in  this  key?”  The  answer  would  be,  "  It 
is  flatted.”  "How  would  you  sharp  it?”  "  How  would 
you  flat  it?”  etc.  Then  you  point  to  a  natural  line  or  space 
and  ask,  "What  is  the  diatonic  condition  of  this  degree?” 
And  you  immediately  perceive,  as  was  shown  in  the  first 
part  of  this  article,  that  "cancel”  can  not  be  given  as  an 
answer. 

Make  people  understand  the  technical  meaning  of  "nat¬ 
ural,”  and  it  will  be  found  far  more  full  and  complete  than 
"cancel  ”  or  "restoral,”  or  any  other  substitute  that  has  been 
proposed. 

1  have  a  little  pamphlet,  entitled  "Cancel  Natural,” 

which  treats  this  subject  somewhat  humorously,  but  in  some 
respects  more  fully  than  this  article  does,  which  I  shall  be 
happy  to  send  free  to  anyone  who  will  apply  for  it. 

(Read  No. 37  in  this  connection.) 


SIGNATURE, 


45 


No.  10.  SIGNATURE. 

What  is  a  signature?  The  sharps  or  flats  at  the  beginning  of  a  com^ 
position  to  show  the  key  or  scale. 

IN  regard  to  this  use  of  the  word  “Scale,”  see  No.  5. 

Has  the  key  of  C  a  signature  ?  It  has  not.  What  is  the  signature  to 
the  key  of  G.  One  sharp. 

The  musician  looks  at  a  little  section  of  the  staff,  just  at 
the  right  of  the  clef,  to  see  what  key  the  staff  is  prepared 
for.  What  he  finds  there  is,  to  him,  the  signature  of  the 
key,  for  '‘signature’’  simply  il^eans  sign  or  signs  of  key. 

What  must  he  see  in  the  signature  place  to  make  sure 
about  the  key  ?  Take  the  last  question  and  answer  first.  Is 
the  “one  sharp”  alone  sufficient — simply  “a  flag  held  up,’^ 
as  some  one  poetically  says,  “  to  show  the  key.^”  Let  us 
see.  Here  is  a  staff,  we  will  suppose,  with  all  of  the  signa¬ 
ture-place  concealed  excepting  the  upper  line  with  its  ‘  ‘  flag.  ” 
Are  you  sure  the  staff'  is  prepared  for  the  key  of  G  You 
say:  “No,  we  must  see  the  rest  of  the  staff.”  Certainly, 
and  that  shows  you,  does  it  not,  that  the  little  “flag”  is  not 
the  whole  of  the  “signature  ”  to  the  key  of  G  ?  It  is  just  as 
important  that  you  should  see  that  the  other  degrees  in  the 
signature-place  are  natural,  as  that  those  affected  by  the 
sharp  are  sharped.  You  must  see  that  all  the  diatonic  tones 
of  the  key  are  there  represented.  That  is  so  quickly  done 
that  one  does  not  perhaps  realize  that  he  sees  anything  but 
the  one  sharp,  until  the  rest  of  the  staff  is  concealed.  Then 
.  he  realizes  that  he  takes  in  the  whole  staff  there  at  a  glance. 
Therefore,  the  whole  description  of  the  signature  of  the  key 
of  G  (that  which  must  bt  seen)  is,  one  degree  sharped,  and 
all  the  rest  not  affected  by  that  sharp,  natural.  But  science 
abbreviates  or  crystallizes  into  the  shortest  terms  possibhv 
all  descriptions  of  its  facts,  therefore  “one  sharp”  is  the 


46 


''don’t/' 

usual  and  proper  name  of  the  signature  of  the  key  of  G 
major.  All,  however,  using  that  term  should  know  what 
the  whole  signature  is. 

When  the  staff  is  ready  for  the  key  of  C  major  the  musi¬ 
cian  looks,  as  before,  into  the  signature-place  to  see  what 
key  the  staff  is  prepared  for,  and  what  does  he  find?  In¬ 
stead  of  a  part  of  the  degrees  natural  and  a  part  of  them, 
sharped  or  flatted,  he  finds  them  all  natural.  .  Is  it  difficult 
to  understand  that  natural  degrees  are  just  as  good  ‘'signs 
of  key  ”  as  sharped  or  flatted  ones  ? 

Surely  not  to  every  open  and  candid  mind.  What  then 
would  the  abbreviation  of  that  description  be  ?  There  is  but 
one  word,  and  that  has  been  used  for  generations.  With  a 
proper  understanding  of  its  technical  meaning,  “natural” 
answers  every  purpose  as  a  name  for  what  must  be  seen  in 
the  signature-place  when  the  staff  is  prepared  for  the  key  of 
C  major,  or,  in  other  words,  as  the  name  of  its  signature. 

1  don’t  know  whether  to  say  that  it  would  give  a  bad 
prominence  to  the  key  of  C  to  consider  that  while  all  other 
keys  have  signatures  it  has  none,  but  1  know  it  would  tend 
to  make  it  different  from  other  keys  in  the  minds  of  learners, 
a  thing  which  every  good  teacher  strives  to  avoid.  He 
wants  his  pupils  to  regard  all  major  keys  as  exactly  alike  in 
their  structure,  and  all  equally  simple,  equally  natural, 
equally  melodious,  and  equally  useful. 

It  is,  of  course,  plain  that  all  this  trouble  comes  from  try¬ 
ing  to  substitute  “  cancel  ”  for  “natural,”  and  necessarily 
trying  to  avoid  the  use  of  the  latter  word  where  “cancel” 
can  not  be  a  substitute. 

For  instance,  a  writer  in  this  dilemma  says: 

“  What  will  be  the  key  sign  with  one  on  the  added  line  below  and  he 
answers:  The  absence  of  sharps  and  flats 

He  is  partly  on  the  right  ground.  He  sees  that  “the  ab¬ 
sence  of  sharps  or  flats  ”  is  a  signature,  for  that  is  exactly 


SIGNATURE. 


47 


whiit  ‘‘key  sign”  means,  but  he  does  not  like  to  put  the 
meaning  of  that  sentence  into  one  word,  for,  if  he  does,  that 
word  must  be  “  natural,”  as  “  cancel  ”  does  not  at  all  answer 
there.  But  science  comes  to  the.  relief  of  the  situation  and 
says  one  word  must  be  used.  It  does  not  matter  that  here 
and  there  a  person  holds  out  against  this  law.  It  will  always 
prevail,  for  it  is  sensible  and  right. 

A  prominent  author  and  class-teacher  says  “  the  signature  to  the  key  of  C 
major  is  not  the  absence  of  anything  but  the  presence  of  something.  It  is  not 
a  negative  but  a  positive  thing,”  etc.,  and  concludes  with  the  statement  that 

the  staff  and  clef  constitute  the  signature  to  that  key. 

* 

It  is  true  you  cand  have  a  signature  without  a  clef,  but  it 
does  not  follow  that  therefore  the  clef  is  a  part  of  the  signa¬ 
ture.  You  can’t  have  a  staff  without  paper  or  blackboard, 
or  something  to  put  it  on,  but  staff  and  paper  are  two 
different  things.  A  clef  is  of  no  use  without  a  staff,  but 
they  are  two.  You  can’t  have  “pitch”  in  a  tone  without 
“length”;  they  are  inseparable,  but  they  are  different  things. 

What  is  a  signature — how  does  it  come  about  ?  This 
way : 

A  composer  is  going  to  write  a  tune.  The  first  thing  he 
does  is  to  put  the  staff  into  such  a  condition  that  it  will  rep¬ 
resent  the  diatonic  tones  (regular  members)  of  the  key  he  is 
going  to  write  in.  This  is  done  in  a  little  section  of  the 
staff  just  at  the  right  of  his  clef. 

If  he  is  going  to  write  in  C  major  the  condition  is  ready 
to  his  hand.  In  some  other  keys  he  has  to  sharp  some  of 
the  degrees,  leaving  the  others  natural;  and  in  some  others, 
flat  some  of  the  degrees,  leaving  the  others  natural,  and 
very  rarely  he  has  to  sharp  all  the  degrees  or  flat  all  the 
degrees. 

Observe  that  the  object  of  his  putting  the  staff  into  one 
of  these  conditions  is  to  make  it  represent  the  key  he  wants. 
It  is  only  incidentally  and  secondarily  that  that  condition 


48 


becomes  the  ''sign  of  key’’  or  "signature,”  but  it  is  the  con¬ 
dition  of  the  staff  in  the  signature  ptace  that  is  the  signature. 

Now,  our  science  condenses  the  descriptions  of  these  va¬ 
rious  conditions  into  the  shortest  possible  terms,  so  we  have 
"natural”  where  all  the  degrees  are  natural,  "one  sharp” 
where  one  degree  is  sharped,  and  all  the  others  not  affected 
by  that  sharp  are  natural,  "two  sharps”  where  two  degrees 
are  sharped  and  all  the  others,  not  affected  by  those  sharps, 
natural,  and  so  on.  Since  the  signature  must  show  all  the 
diatonic  tones  of  the  key,  the  natural,  degrees  (if  there  are 
any)  can  not  be  left  out,  and  never  are,  in  the  glance  which 
takes  note  of  the  signature,  although  nothing  is  said  about 
them. 

There  is  nothing  "  negative”  about  these  conditions.  In 
fact,  there  is  nothing  more  positive  than  all  the  degrees 
natural,  or  one  degree  sharped  and  the  others  natural,  etc.  T o 
go  back  to  the  clef  to  find  something  " positive”  seems  to 
me  not  only  unscientific  but  far-fetched  and  unnecessary. 
When  you  are  looking  for  a  signature  you  take  staff  and 
clef  for  granted.  You  know  those  two  things  must  be  there 
before  the  question  of  a  signature  or  a  sharp  or  a  flat  or  a 
natural  can  come  up.  Staff  and  clef  being  there,  these  other 
things  come  along  in  their  proper  order. 

A  great  dictionary  defines  Signature  as  follows: 

The  designation  of  the  key  (when  not  C  major  or  its  relative  minor)  by 
means  of  one  or  more  sharps  or  flats  at  the  beginning  of  the  staff,  immediately 
after  the  clef,  affecting  all  notes  of  the  same  letters  throughout  the  piece  or 
movement. 

Surely,  everyone  must  see  that  lines  and  spaces  are  not 
letters,  and  that  notes  are  not  letters,  also  that  sharps  and 
flats  affect  lines  and  spaces,  and  not  notes  nor  letters.  They 
do  not  affect  letters  because  there  are  none,  and  they  do  not 
affect  notes  because  all  their  work  is  done  before  a  note  is 
used.  (See  No.  2  in  regard  to  letters.) 


SIGNATURE. 


49 


Let  it  be  remembered  that  a  note  or  notes^  sharped  or  flatted,  as  designated 
by  the  signature,  continue  so  through  the  entire  piece,  unless  the  effect  of 
these  is  cancelled  by  the  use  of  other  accidentals  (sharps,  flats,  or  naturals). 

If  it  is  a  note  that  is  sharped  in  the  signature,  what  hap¬ 
pens  in  the  key  of  G,  for  instance,  if  no  note  touches  that 
upper  line  ?  Does  the  sharp  have  no  effect  ?  Notes  are  not 
sharped  nor  flatted,  but  lines  and  spaces  are,  and  then  notes 
are  put  on  them  if  those  pitches  are  wanted,  but  the  lines 
and  spaces  stand  there  sharped  or  flatted  all  the  same,  if 
notes  do  not  call  them  into  action. 

But  what  struck  me  especially  in  this  statement,  is  the 
broad  and  liberal  way  in  which  the  word  ‘"canceled”  is 
used.  While  it  is  not  true  that  any  musical  effect  is  can¬ 
celled,  it  is  true  that  all  accidentals  are  precisely  alike  in  their 
capacity,  or  rather  incapacity ^  in  that  matter. 

‘  Speaking  of  accidentals  an  author  says: 

Sharps  affect  all  the  notes  upon  the  degree  of  the  staff  upon  which  they 
are  written,  which  come  after  them  in  the  same  measure. 

He  is  partly  over  to  the  true  idea;  that  is,  he  recognizes 
the  fact  that  a  note  is  not  a  “  degree,”  but  is  upon  a  degree, 
but  he  is  entirely  mistaken  in  supposing  that  the  sharp  be¬ 
longs  to  the  note.  The  sharp  is  to  change  the  meaning  of 
the  degree  (the  line  or  space)  for  the  balance  of  the  measure, 
no  matter  what  kind  of  note  is  put  there,  or  how  many  or 
few  notes  are  used.  (See  No.  8.) 


50 


''don’t,” 


No.  II.  OF  THE  SIGNATURE  OF  MINOR  KEYS. 


LL  the  diatonic  pitches  of  a  key  (regular  members)  are 


/  \  supposed  to  be  shown  in  the  signature  place,  but  in 
minor  keys  one  pitch  not  belonging  to  the  key  is  shown 
there,  and  one  pitch  that  does  belong  to  the  key  has  to  be 
shown  by  an  accidental  whenever  it  is  wanted.  So  what  is 
seen  in  the  signature  place  is  not  the  complete  "sign  or  signs 
of  a  minor  key.”  In  short,  we  say,  however,  that  "one 
sharp”  is  the  signature  of  the  key  of  E  minor,  but  it  is  with 
the  understanding  that  we  must  look  elsewhere  before  we 
can  make  sure. 


No.  12.  WHAT  THE  NATURAL  DOES. 


When  a  flat  in  the  signature  is  taken  away  by  a  natural  the  tone  becomes 
sharp.  When  a  sharp  in  the  signature  is  taken  away  by  a  natural  the  tone 
becomes  flat. 

ERE  is  dimly  foreshadowed  the  truth  that  the  natural 


1  i  acts  sometimes  like  a  sharp,  and  sometimes  like  a  Hat, 
but  how  crude  and  full  of  errors  is  the  statement.  A  flat  or 
sharp  in  the  signature  is  never  taken  away,  and  a  tone  never 
becomes  sharp  or  flat  in  the  sense  of  being  raised  or  low¬ 
ered.  Another  tone  may  be  indicated,  which  is  probably 
what  this  author  means. 

How  much  simpler  is  the  true  statement.  The  signature 
shows  the  regular  members  of  the  key.  If  a  line  or  space  is 
Hatted  in  the  signature,  a  "natural”  upon  it  will  act  like  a 
sharp;  if  sharped  in  the  signature,  a  natural  upon  it  will  act 
like  a  Hat;  or,  still  simpler:  in  one  case  the  natural  will  sharp 
it,  and  in  the  other  case  the  natural  will  flat  it.  But  in  con¬ 
nection  with  this  should  be  seen  that  the  regular  members  of 
the  key,  as  shown  in  the  signature,  are  the  diatonic  tones  of 
the  key,  and  that  chromatic  tones  are  represented  by  sharping 
or  flatting  the  diatonic  degrees.  (See  No.  8.) 


SHARP  AND  FLAT. 


5' 


No.  1 3.  SHARP  AND  FLAT. 


GRFAT  dictionary  says  of  the  sharp: 

(a)  The  character  used  to  indicate  that  the  note  before  which  it  is  placed 
is  to  be  raised  a  half  step  or  semitone  in  pitch,  (h)  A  sharp  tone  or  note. 

And  of  ‘‘  flat  ” : 

Not  sharp  or  shrill;  not  acute;  as  a  flat  sound. 

The  words  sharp,  flat,  and  natural,  as  the  names  of  musical 
characters,  and  as  parts  of  the  names  of  absolute  pitches,  as  C- 
sharp,  B-flat,  D-natural,  etc.;  have  not  the  slightest  reference 
to  the  emotional  character  of  tones,  but  refer  simply  and 
wholly  to  pitch.  Tones  named  with  the  word  ‘'flat'’  may 
be  so  related  as  to  be  bold  and  joyful;  tones  named  with 
the  word  “sharp”  may  be  gentle  and  mournful,  and  the  so- 
called  natural  tones  of  music  may  be  either.  Tunes,  cho¬ 
ruses,  and  instrumental  pieces  by  the  thousand  could  be  ad¬ 
duced  to  prove  these  facts. 

To  say  “flat  keys,”  “sharp  keys,”  or  “natural  key,” 
meaning  more  sad,  more  joyful,  or  more  according  to  nature, 
is  wholly  incorrect.  Mournful  and  joyful  may  in  some  de¬ 
gree  be  predicated  of  the  terms  “minor”  and  “major,”  but 
as  many  minor  keys  as  majors  have  sharps  in  their  signa¬ 
tures,  and  as  many  majors  as  minors  have  Oats. 


No.  14.  PITCH  REPRESENTATION. 

A  tone  can  not  be  raised.  A  sharp  placed  before  a  note  does  not  “  raise 
the  note  a  half  step/’  nor  raise  the  tone  a  half  step,”  but  it  causes  the  note 
to  represent  a  new  pitch  a  half  step  higher. 

He  narrowly  escaped  being  exactly  right  in  that  state¬ 
ment.  It  is  the  last  part  of  it  that  gives  a  wrong  idea. 
The  note  does  not  represent  the  pitch,  and  the  sharp  does  not 


52 


“don’t.” 


affect  the  note.  The  line  or  space  represents  the  pitch,  and 
the  sharp  makes  the  line  or  space  stand  fora  pitch  a  half¬ 
step  higher.  Then  you  can  put  one  kind  of  note  upon  it,  or 
another,  or  no  note  at  all,  without  affecting  in  the  least  what 
the  sharp  has  done. 

Notes  are  written  higher  or  lower  according  as  the  tones  are  higher  or  lower. 

Right,  if  it  is  understood  that  notes  do  not  represent  pitch, 
but  only  note  the  lines  and  spaces  that  do.  (See  No.  2.) 


1^ 

No.  IS.  I--SHARP  ON  F.  ■ 


Where  did  1  use  a  new  tone  ?  (F-Sharp  is  the  tone  in  question.)  Oft  F. 

INCE  a  ‘‘  tone  ”  is  something  to  hear,  usi>ig  it  must  mean 


O  playing  or  singing  it.  How  F-sharp  can  be  played  or 
sung  on  F,  which  is  another  tone,  must  puzzle  a  class  to 
see.  Of  course  that  is  not  what  is  meant,  but  it  is  exactly 
what  is  said. 

Yes,  by  sharping  F  we  are  thrown  into  a  new  position,  etc. 

There  is  no  such  thing  as  “sharping  F,”  or  rhanging  it  in 
any  way.  A  new  tone  may  be  introduced  named  F-sharp, 
but  F  can  not  be  changed.  The  trouble  here  probably  comes 
from  thinking  of  some  line  or  space  of  the  staff  as  being  F. 
If  so,  it  is  an  illustration  of  the  fact  that  one  error  is  sure  to 
cause  others  in  the  course  of  its  ramifications. 

How  simple  and  straightforward  is  the  true  phraseology 
in  this  matter: 

Having  properly  introduced  the  new  tone  by  omitting  F 
and  substituting  F-sharp,  the  teacher  asks:  “Is  the  new 
tone  higher  or  lower  than  F.^  Higher.  Is  it  higher  or  lower 
than  G.^  Lower.  Yes,  it  is  a  pitch  between  F  and  G,  and 
is  named  F-sharp.”  Then,  at  the  proper  time:  “What  pitch 
have  we  omitted  that  we  used  when  C  was  keytone?” 


INTERMEDIATE  TONES. 


53 

What  have  we  substituted  ?  F-sharp.  As  the  staff  stands 
now,  what  pitch  does  it  represent  that  we  do  not  want?  F. 
Yes;  so  we’ll  take  those  degrees  which  stand  for  the  F  that 
we  do  not  want,  and  make  them  stand  for  the  F-sharp 
that  we  do  want.  That  is  done  by  a  character  called  a 
“sharp,”  placed  so  (on  the  fifth  line),  and  such  is  its  power 
when  so  placed  that  it  makes  the  octave  below  it  stand  for 
F>sharp  too.  There  are  other  lesser  errors  and  infelicities 
that  we  do  not  mention. 

No.  i6.  INTERMEDIATE  TONE.S. 

In  transposing  the  scale  we  must  preserve  tlie  order  of  intervals  as  in  the 
key  of  C.  To  accomplish  this  we  must  reject  some  of  the  tones  in  the  key 
from  which  the  transposition  is  to  be  made  and  use  instead  certain  interme¬ 
diate  tones. 

In  transpositions  how  do  we  preserve  the  regular  order  of  intervals?  By 
using  certain  intermediate  toiies  as  regular  tones. 

This  is  preparatory  to  practicing  in  the  key  of  G  after 
having  sung  in  the  key  of  C.  1  do  not  see  why  this 
should  be  called  “transposing  the  scale,”  nor  why  there 
should  be  any  talk  about  intervals  yet;  but  my  main  point  is 
the  use  of  the  term  “intermediate  tones.”  Intermediate  tones 
are  chromatic  tones.  F-sharp,  as  it  occurs  in  the  key  of  G,  is 
not  a  chromatic  tone,  and  should  not  be  thought  of  as  an 
intermediate  tone.  It  is  diatonic.  It  is  in  the  key  of  G  exactly 
what  B  is  in  the  key  of  C.  To  give  the  idea  that  C,  D,  E,  F, 
G,  A,  and  B  are  the  principal  or  most  orderly  or  most 
beautiful  tones  of  music,  and  that  all  others  are  intermediate 
or  chromatic,  and  in  some  way  different  in  character,  is  to 
make  a  serious  mistake,  and  an  entirely  wrong  impression  on 
the  mind  of  the  learner.  C  is  “intermediate”  in  the  key  of 
D;  F  is  intermediate  in  the  key  of  G;  B  is  intermediate  in 
the  key  of  F,  and  so  on. 


54 


‘‘don't.” 


It  is  far  better  that  all  the  tones  in  music  named  with  the 
words  “sharp”  or  “flat  ”  (as  F-sharp,  B-flat,  etc.)  should  be 
used  first  as  diatonic  tones.  All  the  major  keys  should  be  so 
learned  and  practiced  before  a  chromatic  tone  is  introduced. 
Then  every  tone  which  has  been  used  diatonically  may  be 
used  chromatically  when  needed,  for  every  such  tone  can 
be  in  some  key  either  as  a  diatonic  or  a  chromatic  tone.  So 
all  the  tones  of  music,  whether  named  with  or  without  the 
word  “sharp”  or  “flat,”  should  be  regarded  as  exactly  alike 
in  their  character,  and  in  their  capacity  to  be  diatonic  or  chro¬ 
matic. 

There  is  not  room  here  to  show  how  every  tone  named 
with  the  word  “sharp”  or  “flat”  can  be  successfully 
brought  in  first  as  a  diatonic  tone.  Any  who  would  care  to 
see  a  way  of  doing  that  will  find  it  in  my  little  “Teachers’ 
Club.” 

No.  17.  TONE,  INTERVAL,  AND  NUMBER. 

The  teacher  gives  the  different  intervals  of  the  major  scale  of  C  from  one 
to  eight,  explaining  that  one  is  the  tonic  or  key-tone  ;  that  the  scale  is 
based  upon  this  fundamental  tone,  and  that  the  other  intervals  naturally 
revolve  around  and  end  upon  this  tone. 

This  writer  seems  here  to  use  the  word  “interval”  to 
mean  “tone.”  If  so,  the  following  criticisms  are  in  order: 
The  smallest  family  consists  of  two,  whether  of  people  or 
tones.  The  largest  tone-family  is  a  “key,”  the  smallest 
an  “interval.”  One  tone  can  no  more  be  an  interval  than 
one  person  can  be  a  family.  (See  No.  7.) 

Would  not  the  following  statement  be  clearer  :  The 
teacher  gives  the  different  tones  of  the  major  scale  from  one 
to  eight,  explaining,  etc.,  that  the  scale  is  based  upon  this 
fundamental  tone,  and  that  the  other  tones  of  the  key  nat¬ 
urally  revolve  around  and  end  upon  it?  (See  No.  5.) 


TONE,  INTERVAL,  AND  NUMBER. 


55 


This  author  goes  on : 

“  When  this  is  comprehended/’ (that  which  has  been  explained  to  this 
point,)  begin  upon  key-tone  one^  give  the  next  degree  of  the  scale,,  and  ask 
what  was  played  last.” 

Here  ‘‘degree”  is  used  for  “tone.”  Degrees  are  not 
tones;  they  are  lines  and  spaces.  “Degrees  of  the  staff” 
is  correct  phraseology,  “l^rees  of  the  scale”  is  not. 
Surely  “tones  of  the  scale”^  right.  Why  use  “degree” 
when  the  true  word  is  clearer  and  more  direct.  For  in¬ 
stance:  “When  this  is  comprehended  begin  with  one,  then 
give  the  next  tone  of  the  scale,  and  ask  what  was  played 
last.”  (See  Nos.  3  and  6  for  fuller  explanation  of  “degrees.”) 
Farther  on  is  an  example,  with  directions  as  follows: 


After  naming  the  number  of  each  tone  as  above,  the  class  may  call  it  by 
“  intervals,”  etc. 

We  no  more  use  numbers  in  music  than  we  do  letters. 
We  use  some  of  their  names  to  name  something  entirely 
different  from  letters  or  numbers,  viz.  :  pitches  of  tones — 
the  letter  names  as  absolute  pitch  names,  and  the  number 
names  as  relative  pitch  names.  For  example:  The  abso¬ 
lute  pitch  C  in  this  key  is  one,  the  absolute  pitch  F  is  four, 
C  here  does  not  name  a  Ltter  nor  four  a  number.  (See  No. 
2  for  fuller  explanation  in  regard  to  letters.)  Perhaps  some 
who  see  the  difference  between  a  letter  and  its  name  may 
not  have  thought  that  there  is  a  similar  difference  in  the  case 
of  “number.”  “  Four,”  for  instance,  as  the  name  of  a  num¬ 
ber,  means  four  things  or  four  units  of  some  kind,  but  in 
music  it  is  the  name  of  one  thing — a  certain  relative  pitcli 
in  every  key.  In  the  sense  of  Jiumbering  the  tones,  the  sec¬ 
ond  tone  in  the  above  lesson  is  four,  the  third  two,  etc. 


56 


‘'don’t/' 


Perhaps  the  way  that  kind  of  numbering  is  done  in  intervals 
and  chords  may  throw  some  light  on  the  subject.  In  the 
above  lesson  one  and  four  do  make  the  first  fourth.  There 
the  naming  and  numbering  coincide,  but  the  second  fourth 
is  made  by  two  and  five.  In  the  tonic  common  chord  in  any 
key  the  fundamental  tone  and  its  third  and  fifth  will  coincide 
with  the  key  names  one,  three,  five,  but  in  the  dominant 
common  chord  its  “first”  “third”  and  “fifth”  will  he  five, 
seven,  and  nine  of  the  key,  and  in  the  subdominant  chord, 
four,  six,  and  eight.  Were  there  any  propriety  in  the  use  of 
the  word  “  number”  in  the  phraseology  1  am  criticising, 
the  word  is  entirely  superfluous  there,  since  the  names  of 
the  pitches  are  shown  by  the  numerals  under  the  notes. 
Read  the  phrase  1  am  criticising,  and  then  the  following. 
Which  is  more  clear  and  concise.^ 

“After  naming  each  tone  as  above,  the  class  may  call  the 
lesson  by  intervals.” 

Write  out  every  scale  in  the  following  manner,  numbering  them,  and  com¬ 
mitting  them  to  memory  so  as  to  be  able  to  tell  at  once  what  a  given  number 
is  in  any  key. 

It  is  not  my  province  to  criticise  grammar  here,  but  to  this 
old  friend  I  would  hint  that  “write  out  all  the  scales,  num¬ 
bering  them,”  or  “  write  out  every  scale,  numbering  it,'' 
would  be  more  in  accordance  with  the  generally  accepted 
ideas  of  grammatical  propriety.  Still  there  would  remain 
the  error  in  musical  phraseology,  on  account  of  which  I 
quote  the  statement. 

We  do  not  number  tones  in  music;  we  name  them. 

We  no  more  give  a  tone  a  number  in  music  than  we  give 
it  a  letter.  We  use  the  names  of  certain  numbers  and  the 
names  of  certain  letters  to  name  something  very  different 
from  numbers  and  letters.  (See  No.  2.) 


KEY  AND  MODE. 


57 


No.  i8.  KEY  AND  MODE. 

Key  refers  merely  to  the  foundation  of  any  recognized  series  of  diatonic 
tones.  Key  is  the  index  to  the  scale.  Mode  refers  to  a  characteristic  series  of 
sounds,  the  fundamental  of  which  is  the  key-tone.  Our  normal  major  scale 
constitutes  the  major  mode  ;  and  when  this  is  transposed  above  or  below  we 
say  the  key  has  changed,  but  t!ie  mode  remains  the  same. 

IDO  not  see  how  the  old  word  '‘mode”  is  of  any  use  here, 
for,  as  this  author  virtually  says,  the  “scale”  means  the 
same  thing — the  major  scale,  the  major  mode — the  minor 
scale,  the  minor  mode. 

“When  the  major  scale  is  transposed  above  or  below  we 
say  the  key  has  changed,  but  the  mode  remains  the  same,’’ 
meaning  probably  that  the  scale  in  every  major  key  has  the 
same  intervals  in  exactly  the  same  succession.  Transposing 
the  scale  is  like  transposing  any  other  melody,  d'he  time 
remains  the  same,  the  only  difference  being  that  it  is  higher 
or  lower. 

The  “key”  is  something  more  than  “the  foundation  of  a 
series  of  tones”;  it  is  the  series  itself  in  any  possible  order 
or  combination,  while  the  scale  is  the  series  in  only  one  par¬ 
ticular  way,  ascending  or  descending.  Foundation,  meaning 
one  tone,  would  apply  fairly  well  to  the  tonic  or  key-tone  of 
the  key,  but  key  and  key-tone  are  by  no  means  the  same 
thing.  The  key  is  the  great  tone  family.  Its  members  for 
harmony  purposes  are  known  by  such  names  as  tonic,  dom¬ 
inant,  etc.  In  vocal  and  instrumental  music  the  same  mem¬ 
bers  are  known  by  such  names  as  key-tone,  one,  three,  five, 
do,  sol,  etc.  (See  No.  5.)  “Key  is  the  index  to  the  scale.” 
The  scale  is  one  of  the  thousands  of  forms  that  the  tones  of 
a  key  may  take.  If  the  key  is  the  index  to  the  scale  it  is  the 
index  to  any  other  melody  or  tune  that  may  be  made  from 
its  tones.  No  tone,  or  succession  of  tones,  differing  from 
the  scale,  can  be  in  the  scale.  There  are  no  thirds,  fourths,  or 
fifths  in  the  scale  ;  nothing  but  seconds  there,  but  all  are  in 
the  family,  or  ‘‘key.” 


58 


1 1 


DON  T. 


No.  19.  METRE  AND  MEASURE. 


From  one  bar  to  another  comprises  a  Measure,  and  the  peculiarity  of 
the  measure,  as  indicated  by  the  metrical  signature  (numerator  and 
denominator),  constitutes  i\\Q  Metre.  If  the  metrical  signature  is  the  piece 
is  in  three-quarter  metre,  because  three-quarters,  or  the  value  thereof,  /ill  the 
measure.  The  metre  is  always  indicated  by  the  numerator  and  denominator. 
Here  are  examples  of  Duple,  Triple  and  Quadruple  metre,  with  the  proper 
accents  for  each. 


ERE  are  two  words  that  seem  to  me  uncalled  for.  Although 


1  1  ‘"Metre”  has  a  similar  meaning  to  measure,  it  belongs 
to  hymnology  and  not  to  music,  and  is  not  in  the  least 
wanted  in  our  science.  Even  in  the  above  statement  it  must 
be  seen  to  be  useless,  for,  wherever  it  is  used,  no  idea  is 
conveyed  by  it  that  “  Measure”  would  not  include. 

“  Duple”  is  a  pretty  word,  and  means  the  right  thing,  and 
if  names  for  measures  were  now  being  proposed  for  the  first 
time,  1  would  vote  for  “duple”  instead  of  “double,”  simply 
because  having  all  the  measure  names  end  with  “  pie”  would 
make  them  more  uniform.  But,  as  “Double”  is  in,  and 
answers  the  purpose  perfectly  well,  it  benefits  no  one  to  pro¬ 
pose  this. 

A  “Measure”  is  a  group  of  beats.  From  one  bar  to  an¬ 
other  is  but  the  sign  of  the  measure,  although,  for  short, 
called  measure. 

The  metre  is  always  indicated  by  the  numerator  and  denominator. 

1  don’t  know  how  it  may  be  with  “Metre,”  but  the  Mens- 
ure  is  indicated  only  by  the  numerator.  The  denominator 
’shows  the  “  beat  note”  (the  kind  of  note  that  coincides  with 
the  beat). 

“The  piece  is  in  three-quarter  metre.”  It  is  going  a  great 
way  from  the  simplicity  of  established  usage  to  propose  this 
ph  rase,  which  does  not  make  the  subject  any  clearer,  and 
certainly  is  not  needed. 


METRE  AND  MEASURE. 


59 


''Metrical  signature  ”  is  not  the  right  term.  "Signature,” 
in  music,  has  reference  only  to  "key.”  (See  No.  9.) 

It  should  be  observed  that  this  writer  says  nothing  about 
the  real  beats  and  measures  of  music,  nor  anything  of  the 
way  that  different  kinds  of  music  cause  different  kinds  of 
measures  by  the  different  grouping  of  beats,  all  of  which 
should  come  first.  Supposing,  however,  that  the  main 
things  have  been  taught,  the  following  statements  would  be 
more  in  accordance  with  established  usage : 

Measures  are  represented  to  the  eye  by  the  spaces  between 
bars.  The  different  kinds  of  measures  are  indicated  by  dif¬ 
ferent  figures:  Double  measure  by  2,  Triple  measure  by  3, 
Quadruple  by  4,  etc.  A  figure  also  indicates  the  note  that 
coincides  with  the  beat  of  the  measure  (called  the  "beat- 
note”).  This  is  placed  below  the  figure  indicating  the  meas¬ 
ure,  and  the  two  make  what  is  called  the  "  measure  sign,” 
I,  for  example,  indicates  Triple  measure,  with  the  quarter 
for  beat-note,  or  three-quarters  or  their  value  in  each  meas¬ 
ure.  Here  are  examples,  etc. : 

No.  20.  MEASURE  SIGN. 

The  figures  at  the  beginning  of  a  composition  are  called  the  Fraction, 

NO;  they  are  called  the  Measure  Sign.  The  measure  sign 
is  in  the  form  of  a  fraction;  but  "Fraction,”  though  a 
good  stepping-stone  while  explaining,  is  not  the  technical 
term  in  music.  There  is  no  need  to  borrow  this  mathemat¬ 
ical  term  for  our  musical  purposes.  We  have  a  good  one  of 
our  own. 

What  do  we  call  sharps,  or  flats,  when  placed  at  the  beginning  of  a  com¬ 
position  ?  Key  Signature. 

Figures  placed  at  the  beginning  of  a  composition  indicate  what  ?  Kind  of 
measure  {called  measure  signature). 


6o 


don’t/’ 


The  word  ''Signature”  stands  by  itself  in  music.  The 
prefix  "Key”  is  useless,  as  "Signature”  refers  to  key,  and 
to  nothing  else.  The  prefix  "Measure”  is  wrong,  for 
"  Signature  ”  has  nothing  to  do  with  measure.  The  common 
name  for  the  figures  which  indicate  the  kind  and  variety  of 
measure,  "measure  sign,”  is  entirely  adequate,  convenient, 
and  satisfactory.  It  seems  to  the  writer  much  better  to  leave 
the  word  "Signature”  to  its  one  important  meaning.  It  is 
certainly  unnecessary  to  mix  it  up  with  measure. 

"What  do  we  call  sharps  and  flats,  when  placed  at  the 
beginning  of  a  composition?”  is  not  a  good  question.  (See 
No.  9.) 

No.  21.  MEASURE  AND  TIME. 


A  WRITER  .says  |  is  double  time,  first  variety. 

Double  measure,  half  variety,  would  be  better.  The 
word  “time,”  in  music  (tempo),  has  reference  to  movement. 
As- the  word  “measure”  is  so  well  understood,  and  is  in 
such  constant  use,  there  is  no  need  of  the  word  “time”  to 
mean  measure.  “First  variety,”  “second  variety,”  etc.,  is 
not  so  direct  and  evident  as  “half  variety,”  “quarter 
variety,”  “eighth  variety,”  etc.  The  only  way  in  which  the 
word  “time”  refers  to  measure  in  music  is  in  the  phrase 
“beating  time,”  and  there  its  only  meaning  is  keeping  with 
tlie  beats  of  the  music,  either  mentally,  or  by  hand  or  baton. 


“sharped.”  “flatted.”  6l 

No.  22.  “SHARPED.”  “FLATTED.” 

We  often  hear  that  a  certain  note  is  ‘‘  sharped  ”or  flatted,” yet  both  words 
are  grammatically  incorrect.  When  the  pitch  is  raised  or  lowered  by  a  chro¬ 
matic  alteration  it  may  be  said  to  have  been  sharpened^'  or  flattened." 

There  is  no  such  thing  as  raising  or  lowering  a  pitch  by 
'‘chromatic  alteration,”  or  in  any  other  way.  You  can 
have  another  pitch,  but  every  pitch  has  its — well,  its  own 
pitch,  and  there  it  stays. 

Notes  are  neither  sharped  nor  flatted,  nor  sharpened  nor 
flattened.  Those  terms  are  properly  applied  only  to  lines 
and  spaces.  A  line  or  space  is  always  in  one  of  five  condi¬ 
tions:  it  is  either  natural,  sharped,  flatted,  double-sharped, 
or  double-flatted;  then  one  kind  of  note  or  another  may  be 
put  upon  it.  The  presence  or  absence  of  the  note  has  noth¬ 
ing  to  do  with  the  sharping  or  flatting. 

Since  writing  the  foregoing,  a  correspondent  of  the  Visitor 
has  also  raised  the  question  of  the  correctness  of  the  expres¬ 
sion,  "sharped  line.”  In  reply,  let  me  add  the  following 
to  what  is  said  above:  It  is  certain  that  we  must  sometimes 
put  a  sharp  on  a  line,  and  nothing  seems  to  me  more  simple 
and  direct  than  to  call  that  process  " sharping  the  line,”  and 
when  it  is  done,  to  say  the  line  is  "sharped,” — meaning 
simply  that  a  sharp  is  put  upon  it. 

The  word"  sharp,  ”as  is  seen,  is  used  in  music  both  as  a  noun 
and  as  a  verb.  As  a  noun,  it  is  the  name  of  a  musical  char¬ 
acter  and  a  part  of  the  name  of  certain  independent  tone- 
pitches,  as  C-sharp,  F-sharp,  etc.  As  a  verb,  it  describes 
the  process  spoken  of  above,  and  is  also  used  to  describe  a 
certain  kind  of  performing  out  of  tune;  but  that  is  another 
subject.  In  what  we  are  talking  about  we  can  only  "sharp” 
something  by  putting  a  sharp  upon  it,  and  the  only  thing 
a  sharp  is  ever  put  upon  is  a  line  or  space. 

It  is  true  that  we  can  not  sharp  F.  We  can  have  another 


62 


‘'don’t/' 

pitch  named  F-sharp,  but  that  opens  up  an  entirely  different 
subject  from  lines  and  spaces.  Let  us  go  into  it  with  some 
care,  and  if  we  get  at  its  true  inwardness  it  will  not  only 
help  here,  but  will  throw  light  upon  kindred  topics. 

Under  the  head  of  “  Music,”  two  entirely  different  kinds 
of  things  are  included,  viz. :  Tones — things  to  hear,  and  their 
Signs — things  to  see.  F,  G,  C-sharp,  B-flat,  etc.,  are  tones.. 
Lines  and  spaces,  sharps  and  flats,  are  signs.  Now,  while 
you  can  put  one  sign  on  another,  as  a  sharp  on  a  line,  because 
both  are  things  to  see,  you  can  not  put  a  sharp  on  a  tone — 
because  one  is  a  thing  to  see  and  the  other  a  thing  to  hear. 
So  while  it  is  sensible  enough  to  talk  about  sharping  a  line, 
it  is  utterly  absurd  to  talk  about  sharping  F,  because  F  is  a 
tone.  Does  anyone  think  that  F  is  the  name  of  a  line.^  If 
so,  its  name  is  sometimes  F-sharp,  sometimes  F-double- 
sharp.  Use  different  clefs  and  it  would  have  at  least  twenty 
other  names.  (See  No.  2.)  No,  that  line  has  but  one  name ; 
but  the  thing  named  fifth  line  may  be  so  modified  by  clefs, 
and  by  being  sharped  or  flatted  or  double-sharped  or  double- 
flatted,  as  to  be  the  sign  or  representation  to  the  eye  of 
many  different  tones. 

The  things  in  music  named  C,  1),  F-sharp,  B-tlat,  etc., 
can  not  be  seen.  It  is  only  their  signs  thiit  are  seen. 

Is  it  correct  to  speak  of  sharping  a  line  or  space  ?  Is  not  F-sharp  or  A-tlat  a 
tone  entirely  independent  of  F,  or  A  ? 

That  looks  as  if  he  thinks  F  is  a  line  and  A  a  space,  and 
that  I  supposed  I  was  sharping  F  when  1  was  preparing  a 
line  to  represent  the  tone  F-sharp,  and  that  1  was  flatting  A 
when  I  was  preparing  a  space  to  represent  the  tone  A-flat. 

1  assure  him  that  I  had  no  idea  of  such  a  thing  as  sharping  a 
tone  or  flatting  a  tone,  but  I  had  a  very  clear  idea  of  putting 
a  sharp  on  a  line  to  make  it  represent  the  tone  F-sharp,  and 
of  putting  a  flat  on  a  space  to  make  it  represent  the  tone  A- 
flat. 


"'sharped.”  "flatted.”  6) 

No.  When  we  put  the  shiirp  on  the  line  we  are  not  doiitg 
anything  to  F.  That  tone  is  "way  off”  in  another  world — 
the  world  of  sound — while  we,  with  our  signs,  are  in  the 
world  of  sight.  When  we  put  the  sharp  on  the  line,  or,  to 
speak  more  concisely,  when  we  sharp  the  line,  it  stands 
silent,  waiting  for  somebody  with  voice  or  instrument  to 
produce  the  tone  it  calls  for.  For  short,  we  say  that  that 
line,  so  modified,  is  F-sharp,  but  it  isn’t:  it  is  only  its  sign. 
Just  as  we  say  this — $1.00 — is  one  dollar,  but  it  isn’t;  it  is 
only  the  sign  of  a  dollar.  It  calls  for  it,  perhaps,  if  it  is  on  a 
bill  that  you  ought  to  pay. 

Is  not  F-sharpthe  name  of  a  particular  pitch,  without  sharping  anytliing ? 

Certainly.  But  you  can  not  represent  that  particular  pitch 
without  sharping  something. 

Literally,  is  anything  made  flat  or  sharp  ? 

1  do  not  think  those  would  be  good  words  to  describe 
what  is  done,  but  the  fact  remains  that  flats  and  sharps  are 
put  upon  lines  and  spaces,  and,  in  accordance  with  scientific 
usage,  there  must  be  some  concise  way  of  stating  that  fact 
when  it  occurs. 

It  would  appear  that  a  line  or  space  can  not  be  flatted  or  sharped  any  more 
than  a  letter  (normal  pitch-name),  and  that  such  an  expression  tends  to  con¬ 
vey  a  wrong  impression  to  the  pupil. 

1  hope  it  does  not  appear  to  the  reader  of  this  article  that  a 
line  or  space  can  not  be  sharped  or  flatted,  and  sincerely 
trust  that  no  wrong  impression  will  be  made  by  the  forego¬ 
ing  on  the  mind  of  any  pupil.  All  I  wish  to  say  further,  is,, 
that  we  do  not  use  letters  in  our  musical  notation,  unless  the 
clefs  be  considered  letters.  (See  No.  2.) 


64  “don’t.” 

No.  23.  ACCIDENTAL.  CHROMATIC  ALTERATION. 


The  Vv'ord  “  accidental  ”  is  also  employed  incorrectly  in  reference  to  a  for¬ 
eign  tone  not  contained  in  the  scale  in  which  a  composition  is  written.  In 
such  cases  it  would  be  preferable  to  speak  of  the  foreign  tone,  in  a  general 
way,  as  a  chromatic  alteration,  or,  be  specific  and  say,  /;-flat,  ^-sharp,  c-nat- 
ural,  for  it  is  not  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  composer  used  the  tone  acci¬ 
dentally. 

The  writer  of  the  above  seems  to  think  that  ‘'accidental” 
is  intended  to  be  used  in  music  with  something  of  its 
common  meaning,  and  for  that  reason  suggests  a  way  of 
avoiding  its  use. 

That  is  a  not  uncommon  error,  and  leads  to  just  such  un¬ 
fortunate  phrases  as  “  chromatic  alteration,”  which  is  not 
only  unnecessary,  but  incorrect.  The  “foreign  tone”  is  just 
as  liable  to  be  a  diatonic  tone  of  a  neighboring  key  (in  a 
modulation)  as  to  be  a  chromatic  tone  in  the  key  in  use,  and 
when  it  is  a  diatonic  tone,  a  chromatic  alteration  to  repre¬ 
sent  it  would  indeed  be  a  strange  contradiction  in  terms. 

An  accidental  is  not  a  tone;  it  is  simply  a  sharp,  flat,  or 
natural  elsewhere  than  in  the  signature  place — something  to 
see — nothing  to  hear.  The  accidental  sometimes  helps  to 
represent  a  chromatic  tone,  and  sometimes  a  diatonic  tone 
(the  latter  in  modulation).  Of  course  the  accidental  is  never 
used  “by  accident.”  He  who  thinks  that  is  the  meaning 
intended,  will  be  in  constant  trouble.  It  would  be  as  if  one 
thought  the  intention  of  “  natural”  in  music  is  to  mean  that 
one  tone,  or  one  scale,  or  one  key  has  more  “naturalness” 
than  another,  or  that  “sharp”  means  more  shrill  or  high, 
and  “flat”  more  dull  or  low.  Such  thoughts  lead  the 
teacher  astray  in  his  explanations,  to  the  confusion  of  his 
pupils. 

Only  the  technical  meanings  of  these  words  should  be 
thought  of  in  their  musical  use.  It  is  not  of  the  least  con¬ 
sequence  what  their  other  meanings  are.  (See  No.  25.) 


ACCIDENTAL.  CHROMATIC  ALTERATION.  65 

The  word  accidentar’  is,  therefore,  employed  correctly 
when  speaking  of  the  character  that  aids  in  representing  the 
''foreign  tone.”  It  is  the  duly  appointed  and  only  character 
that  changes  the  meaning  of  the  line  or  space  so  that  it  will 
represent  the  pitch  wanted.  A  chromatic  or  a  diatonic  alter¬ 
ation  of  the  meaning  of  the  line  or  space  will  be  the  result, 
but  the  "accidental”  is  the  cause. 

For  it  is  not  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  composer  used  the  tone  acci¬ 
dentally. 

Nor  is  it  reasonable  to  suppose  that  he  thought  of  such  a 
thing  while  using  the  word  "accidental”  with  its  musical 
meaning. 

In  the  scale  in  which  a  composition  is  written. 

A  composition  is  written  in  a  "key,”  not  in  a  scale.  There 
is  nothing  in  the  scale  in  the  way  of  a  melody  but  the  scale. 
One  tune  or  melody  can  not  be  in  another. 

The  chromatic  alteration  is  merely  the  means  of  arriving  at  the  new  key 
or  location,  etc. ;  and  again : 

Every  chromatic  alteration  does  not  necessitate  a  change  of  key. 

Evidently  in  this  author’s  mind  "chromatic  alteration” 
means  the  use  of  an  accidental.  Accidentals  often  indicate 
diatonic  tones.  When  that  is  the  case,  1  should  suppose 
"diatonic  alteration”  would  be  preferred.  It  is  certain  that 
in  such  cases  "  chromatic  alteration”  is  not  correct.  I  can 
not  imagine  why  such  an  expression  should  be  used  when 
the  usual  phraseology  is  so  much  clearer  and  better.  Here 
it  is: 

"The  accidental  is  merely  the  means  of  arriving  at  the 
new  key.”  (Here  is  where  the  accidental  indicates  a  dia¬ 
tonic  tone.)  "Every  accidental  does  not  indicate  a  change 
of  key.”  (Here  is  where  the  accidental  would  indicate  a 
chromatic  tone.) 


66 


DON  T. 


A  recent  writer  in  the  Visitor  suggests  “  Incidental”  as  a 
substitute  for  ‘‘Accidental.”  Certainly  the  common  meaning 
of  Incidental  for  musical  purposes  is  not  so  far  out  of  the 
way  as  is  that  of  Accidental.  The  character  referred  to  is 
surely  one  of  the  incidents  in  the  notation  of  a  piece  of  music 
where  it  occurs,  but  it  is  never  an  accident.  Still,  it  does  not 
fill  the  bill.  Its  common  meaning  is  neither  distinctive  nor 
descriptive.  We  should  have  to  give  it  a  technical  meaning, 
and  that  is  all  we  have  to  do  to  Accidental. 


No.  24.  RAI5ING  A  TONE. 


This  is  produced  by  raising  the  root  of  an  essential  seventh  chord  one  chro¬ 


matic  step. 


OU  can  not  raise  a  tone;  you  can  have  another  a  half 


1  step  higher.  “The  seventh  chord”  is  the  phrase  you 
would  use  if  you  were  numbering  successive  chords  and  had 
arrived  at  the  seventh  one.  The  usual  phraseology,  “the 
chord  of  the  seventh,”  is  better.  The  phrase  “one  chro¬ 
matic  step”  applied  to  a  pitch  a  half  step  higher  is  strange 


indeed. 


This  author  says  that  the  Plagal  Cadence  embraces  the 
harmonies  of  the  subdominant  and  tonic,  and  there  he  is 
right;  but  he  follows  with  “in  other  words,  with  the  chords 
of  the  fourth  and  first  degrees,”  and  there  he  is  not  so  clear 
as  if  he  had  said  “the  chords  of  four  and  one,” for  “four  ” 
and  “one”  are  the  key  names  of  the  fundamental  tones  of 
those  two  chords,  while  degrees  are  not  the  names  of  tones 
at  all,  but  of  lines  and  spaces.  (See  Nos.  3  and  6.) 


.  r  i 


\ 


TECHNICAL  TERMS — TONALITY. 


67 


No.  25.  THCHNICAL  TERMS. 

The  technical  names  applied  to  each  note  of  the  scale  should  also  be  under¬ 
stood.  The  first  note  of  a  scale  is  called  Tonic;  t.  c.,  keytone;  the  second, 
Supertonic,  the  next  degree  above  the  Tonic,  etc. 

Among  musical  terms,  some  are  '‘technical,”  that  is, 
used  with  a  meaning  more  or  less  different  from  their 
common  meanings;  some  are  used  ivith  their  common 
meanings,  and  some  are  “to  the  manner  born,”  that  is,  their 
musical  meaning  is  their  common  meaning,  and  they  are 
only  technical  when  used  elsewhere  than  in  music.  For 
example,  “tone”  is  at  home  in  music;  it  is  not  technical 
there;  but  when  used  in  painting,  as  the  “tone”  of  a  picture, 
it  is  technical  in  that  art;  and  in  medical  parlance,  as  the 
“tone”  of  the  system,  it  is  technical  there,  thus  having  dif¬ 
ferent  meanings  for  its  different  uses. 

1  do  not  think  the  above  terms  should  be  called  “technical.” 
They  belong  primarily  to  music,  with  perhaps  one  exception, 
“dominant.”  But  that  is  not  important.  1  would  suggest 
a  very  small  “don’t”  for  that — it  is  saying  that  those  are 
names  of  the  different  degrees  of  the  scale  that  requires  cap¬ 
itals.  (See  No.  5.) 


No.  26.  TONALITY. 

In  its  general  application  this  (Tonality)  refers  to  our  eighty-eight  chromatic 
tones;  to  the  twelve  major  scales;  the  several  forms  of  the  minor  scale;  to 
our  system  of  related  and  unrelated  keys;  and  the  science  of  Harmony.  But 
Ihe  application  in  this  book  is  to  our  impression  of  the  key  at  any  particular 
point,  and  the  relationship  between  the  new  and  old  fundamental.  A  few 
examples  will  set  this  forth  in  plainer  light. 

Then  comes  a  musical  example  of  six  measures;  the 
first  measure  in  the  key  of  C  major,  the  second  in  the 
key  of  D  minor,  the  third  and  fourth  in  G  major,  and  the  fifth 


68 


‘‘don’t.” 


and  sixth  in  C  major.  These  simple  facts  he  expresses  in 
the  following  language: 

The  tonality  in  the  first  measure  is  plainly  that  of  C  major.  At  (b)  the 
tonality  is  recognized  as  that  of  D  minor  even  before  the  resolution  on  the 
third  beat.  The  chord  at  (d)  destroys  the  impression  of  D  minor  because 
^-natural  does  not  occur  in  that  key.  The  discord  at  (e)  establishes  the  to¬ 
nality  as  that  of  G.  The  concord  at  (f)  does  not  affect  the  tonality;  but 
when  the  F-sharp  is  canceled  at  (g)  the  key  of  the  dominant  disappears,  and 
the  ear  anticipates  the  return  of  the  original  tonality  as  at  (c). 

While  the  above  might  be  stated  in  simpler  language,  this 
author  has  one  phrase  exactly  right:  “  because  Z7-natural  does 
not  occur  in  that  key.''  But  1  do  not  see  why  he  did  not  say 
“because  /^-natural  does  not  occur  in  that  scale,"  since  he 
generally  uses  the  word  “scale”  for  “key.”  (See  No.  5.) 
“  But  when  the  F-sharp  is  canceled  at  (g)/’  etc.  F-sharp  is 
not  canceled — it  is  there,  and  its  effect  is  there  just  as  long 
as  it  is  wanted.  Then  a  new  pitch  is  introduced.  Stopping 
one  effect  and  introducing  another  is  not  canceling.  If  it 
were,  every  accidental  cancels  whenever  it  appears.  So 
does  the  bar  that  follows  an  accidental.  (See  No.  8.) 

“The  key  of  the  dominant  disappears,”  etc.  That  phrase 
might  perhaps  answer  if  the  facts  were  in  the  mind  of  him 
who  uses  it;  but  learners  should  not  be  subjected  to  that 
risk.  There  is  no  such  thing  as  “the  key  of  the  dominant.” 
Keys  are  not  founded  upon  dominants,  but  upon  tonics. 
That  which  teas  dominant  in  one  key  may  become  tonic  in 
another.  Of  course  that  is  the  meaning  here. 

But  the  first  sentence  in  this  quotation  calls  for  special  re¬ 
mark.  It  is  where  he  speaks  of  “  our  eighty-eight  chro¬ 
matic  tones.  ” 

Every  tone  in  music,  that  is,  every  absolute  pitch,  is  some¬ 
times  diatonic  and  sometimes  chromatic-,  excepting  those 
named  with  the  words  double  sharp  and  double  flat,  which 
are  not  used  as  diatonic  tones  to  any  extent.  (See  No.  34.) 


TONALITY.  69 

C  is  just  as  liable  to  be  chromatic  as  diatonic,  and  C-sharp 
is  just  as  liable  to  be  diatonic  as  chromatic. 

If  this  author  means  that  all  the  tones  in  music  named  with 
the  words  sharp  or  Oat,  as  F-sharp,  B-flat,  etc.,  are  chro¬ 
matic,  and  that  C  D  E  F  G  A  and  B  and  their  octaves  are 
not  chromatic,  he  makes  a  grave  mistake,  for  the  latter  are 
just  as  often  chromatic  as  the  former. 

Whether  he  is  speaking  only  of  the  key  of  C  major,  or 
that  there  are  eighty-eight  chromatic  tones  in  each  of  the 
great  tone-families^  it  is  an  unfortunate  expression,  for  it 
must'give  a  wrong  impression  of  the  facts  to  a  learner.  If 
he  had  said  “  Tonality  refers  to  all  diatonic  and  chromatic 
tones;  to  the  twelve,”  etc.,  he  would  have  stated  clearly 
what  1  suppose  he  means. 


No.  27.  AlJGMFNTl^D  PRIMH  AND  MINOR  SECOND. 

What  name  is  given  to  the  interval  from  one  to  shar[-)  one  (C  to  C-sharp, 
etc.)?  Primed 


TWO  tones  of  the  same  pitch  constitute  a  “prime.”  C 
and  C-sharp  make  what  is  called  a  chromatic  interval, 
sometimes  called  an  augmented  prime.  Then  the  form  of 
the  question  is  not  right.  From  C  to  C-sharp  is  a  half  step; 
from  six  to  seven  of  the  harmonic  minor  key  is  a  step-and- 
a-half.  The  musical  effect  of  the  first  interval  is  “augment¬ 
ed  prime,”  and  of  the  second  “augmented  second.” 

This  questioner  is  right  in  some  previous  questions-,  as 
“  What  is  the  size  of  the  interval  from  one  to  two  of  the  har¬ 
monic  minor  scale  .^”  "'A  stepA  That  is  right.  “Size,”  or 

“  difference  of  pitch,”  or  “  distance”  (so  to  speak),  in  fact,  all 
the  measurements  which  we  do  not  hear,  but  calculate,  are 
well  described  by  the  terms  “step,”  “  half  step,”  etc.  If  he 
had  continued,  and  asked  what  musical  effects  do  those 


70  “'don’t/' 

tones  produce  heard  near  together  ?  the  proper  answer 
would  be,  a  major  second. 

There  is  nothing  more  orderly  and  beautiful  in  our  science 
than  this  plan  of  describing  the  two  things  which  are  called 
by  the  one  name  of  “Interval,” — which  things  are  the  differ¬ 
ence  of  pitch  between  two  tones  (of  different  pitch),  and  the 
musical  effect  of  the  two  when  heard  together.  (See  No.  7.) 

Those  who  mix  these  terms,  or  think  they  can  use  the 
emotional  terms  for  measurements,  get  into  difficulties,  one 
of  which  may  be  shown  as  follows: 


“  What  interval  is  this — 


“  A  minor  second."' 

“  How  far  apart  must  tones  be  to  make  a  minor  second 
“  A  minor  second." 


“What  interval  is  this — 


''A  chromatic  interval  or  augmented  prime." 

“  How  far  apart  must  tones  be  to  produce  this  interval  ?" 

Here  he  is  in  trouble.  He  can  not  say  “  minor  second.” 
No  musician  would  admit  that,  and  if  the  man  is  sensible  he 
now  sees  the  necessity  for  a  different  term  for  measuring 
purposes. 

How  clear  and  logical  the  true  way  is. 

“  How  far  apart  are  the  tones  that  make  a  minor  second  ?” 

“  A  half  step." 

“  How  far  apart  are  the  tones  that  make  a  chromatic  in¬ 
terval  ?  " 

“  A  half  step." 

“  Why  then  are  they  not  alike  ?  " 

“  Because  in  their  use,  especially  in  harmony,  they  produce 
entirely  different  musical  effects." 


AUGMENTED  PRIME  AND  MINOR  SECOND. 


I  might  add  that  the  tones  of  a  minor  third  and  of  an  aug¬ 
mented  second  are  the  same  distance  apart,  while  their 
effects  are  totally  different. 

The  following  remarks  upon  the  effect  that  relationship 
produces  not  only  upon  tones  but  upon  intervals,  may  he  of 
use  in  this  connection. 

Give  a  tone  alone  upon  the  piano — middle  C  for  example. 
It  has  no  particular  emotional  effect.  Add  the  E-flat  next 
above  it  and  it  instantly  becomes  plaintive  and  mournful. 
Play  C  and  E  together  and  both  become  cheerful.  So  it  is 
seen  that  single  tones  are  effected  in  their  emotional  charac¬ 
ter  by  relationship.  •  Let  us  see  how  it  is  with  Intervals. 


Play  the  minor  third  again 


Now 


add  the  major  third  below — and  every  particle 

of  sadness  disappears  from  the  uiinor  third. 

Play  in  the  key  of  C  major  a  moment  to  get  the  key  of 
A-flat  out  of  the  mind,  and  then  play  C  and  D-flat  thus — 


That  interval  has  a  somber  effect. 


Now  let  it  be  put  into  relationship  with  the  other  seconds 
of  the  scale  in  A-flat  major — 


Lx 

^  L— 

and  all  its  somberness  disappears.  All  this  is  to  call  atten¬ 
tion  to  a  very  important  thing  in  music,  viz. :  the  different 
effects  produced  by  tone-relationship,  as  exemplified  and 
illustrated  in  the  tone-families,  from  the  smallest  (the  Inter¬ 
val)  to  the  largest  (the  Key). 


72 


“don’t.” 


No.  28.  CLEF. 

of  the  great  dictionaries  defines  the  clef  thus: 

A  character  used  in  musical  notation  to  determine  the  position  and  pitch  of 
the  scale  as  represented  on  the  staff. 

Observe,  this  definition  connects  the  clef  with  the  scale 
primarily,  and  secondarily  with  the  staff,  while  the  fact  is 
that  the  clef  determines  the  pitch  representation  of  the  staff, 
and  then  the  scale  or  any  other  succession  or  combination  in 
the  key  of  C  major  may  be  represented  upon  it  by  7wting  the 
lines  or  spaces  wanted;  but  the  entire  work  of  the  clef  is 
done  before  a  note  is  used ;  and  were  any  other  key  than  C 
major  to  be  represented  the  clef  alone  would  not ''determine 
the  pitch,”  other  staff  modifiers  (sharps  or  flats)  would  have 
to  be  added.  So  neither  the  word  scale  nor  note  has  any 
proper  place  in  the  definition  of  clef. 

But  a  still  greater  defect  in  the  definition  is  that  it  omits 
the  reasons  for  clefs.  Were  the  object  of  the  clef  only  "to 
determine  the  position  or  pitch  of  the  scale,”  one  clef  would 
be  enough,  but  each  clef  makes  the  staff  represent  the  pitches 
of  a  certain  voice  or  instrument  range  or  compass  as  much  as 
possible  by  its  long  lines  and  spaces.  The  Treble  clef,  for 
instance,  makes  the  second  line  stand  for  G,  and  so  keeps  the 
pitch  representation  of  the  ordinary  voices  of  women  nearly 
within  the  five  lines  and  their  spaces.  So  the  F,  or  Base,  clef 
makes  the  staff  represent  the  lower  voices  of  men,  and  the  C, 
or  Tenor,  clef  makes  it  represent  the  higher  voices  of  men 
with  hardly  an  added  degree. 

Clefs,  sharps,  flats,  naturals,  double  sharps,  and  double  flats 
are  staff  modifiers.  They  have  to  do  only  with  lines  and 
spaces.  Observe  the  difference  between  representing  a  pitch 
and  indicating  it.  When  the  staff  is  prepared  for  a  key  by 
clef  and  signature,  all  the  pitches  of  the  key  are  represented, 


TENOR  CLEF — TRANSPOSITION. 


73 


but  none  are  indicated.  Notes  indicate  the  pitches  wanted 
while  showing  how  long  to  make  them.  See  No.  i. 


No.  29.  TENOR.  CLEF. 


Some  have  commenced  using  what  they  call  the  Tenor  clef,  but  as  the  lines 
and  spaces  in  the  Tenor  part  have  the  same  names  as  in  the  Treble  and  Alto 
parts,  there  is  not  the  shadow  of  a  necessity  for  another  clef,  and  using  one 
puts  a  wholly  unnecessary  obstacle  in  the  path  of  learners. 

HERE  are  two  reasons  for  the  Tenor  clef,  one  very  im- 


1  portant  and  the  other  appreciable.  The  first  is  making 
the  staff  represent  the  exact  pitch  of  Tenor  voices  instead  of 
an  octave  higher  as  the  Treble  clef  does.  The  second  is  that 
the  Tenor  part  may  be  quickly  distinguished  from  the  So¬ 
prano.  Instead  of  being  an  obstacle  in  the  way  of  learners, 
which  it  never  is,  it  often  removes  one. 


No.  30.  TRANSPOSITION. 


When  any  other  than  C  is  taken  as  tonic,  what  is  the  change  called  ? 
Transposition  f  or  from  one  key  to  another J. 


HIS  is  misleading.  “  Transposition”  takes  place  only 


1  when  the  same  tune,  phrase,  exercise,  or  scale  is  given 
in  one  key  and  then  in  another,  or  when  a  piece  is  given  in 
a  different  key  from  the  one  in  which  it  is  written.  Giving 
one  piece  in  one  key  and  then  taking  another  tonic  and 
forming  a  new  key  with  different  exercises  is  not  transposi¬ 
tion,  and  simply  going  from  one  key  to  another  should  not 
be  so  called. 


74 


don’t/^ 

No.  31.  ON  REPRESENTING  KEYS.  KEYTONE. 

IN  an  excellent  work,  which  is  refreshingly  true  in  its  use 
of  musical  terms,  there  is  one  thing  to  which  1  say 
“don’t.”  It  is  applying  “do”  to  different  degrees  of  the  staff, 
and  having  lessons  really  in  different  keys,  without  any  sig¬ 
nature. 

The  proper  signature  does  not  hinder  the  practice  in  the 
least,  and  may  be  used  without  explanation,  just  as  minor 
and  chromatic  scales  can  be  practiced  to  advantage  before 
their  structure  is  explained.  The  teacher  calls  attention  to, 
and  names,  the  signature,  and  says  it  will  be  explained  later. 

What  is  the  advantage  of  this.^  The  pupil  gets  accustomed 
to  the  looks  of  the  signature,  and  quickly  associates  it  with 
the  location  of  the  syllables  (so  to  speak).  For  instance, 
with  four  sharps  on  the  treble  staff  he  connects  “do”  with 
the  first  line,  with  one  sharp  “do” on  the  second  line,  etc. 
There  is  then  nothing  to  unlearn  or  change,  later.  He  will 
simply  go  deeper  into  the  meaning  of  what  he  has  become 
accustomed  to  the  appearance  of. 

What  is  the  objection  to  my  friend’s  plan.^  The  oppor¬ 
tunity  is  lost  for  the  important  matter  of  associating  certain 
appearances  of  the  staff  with  certain  applications  of  the  syl¬ 
lables,  a  new  condition  comes  in  when  the  signature  is  given, 
the  whole  has  a  new  look  and  there  is  a  sort  of  setback,  and 
all  without  the  slightest  advantage  or  compensation  to  the 
learner. 

My  friend  objects  to  keytone,  because  he  says  all  the  tones 
of  a  key  are  keytones.  No,  all  the  tones  of  a  key  are  not 
“keytones.”  All  are  “members  of  the  key,”  or  “tones  of 
the  key,”but  only  one  is“keytone.”  That  is  Xht  right  oi 
a  technical  term,  to  have  a  separate  meaning  when  it  is 
used  to  apply  to  one  particular  thing.  The  science  has  a 
perfect  right  to  apply  that  word  to  one  tone  of  the  key,  and 


MENTAL  EFFECTS  OF  TONES.  7S 

there  is  not  the  slightest  danger  that  any  other  member  of 
the  key  will  be  called  the  keytone. 

All  the  tones  and  signs  of  music  are  natural,  or  at  least 
one  is  just  as  natural  as  another,  but  that  does  not  prevent 
the  word natural’’ from  being  technically  applied  to  certain 
things  in  the  science  and  not  to  all. 

No.  32.  MENTAL  EFFECTS  OF  TONES. 

When  a  singer  reads  Hie  notes  by  remembering  wliat  each  line  or  space 
means,  he  is  said  to  be  reading  by  abstract  pitch.  When  a  singer  reads  the 
notes  by  computing  tlie  distance  from  each  note  to  the  next,  lie  is  said  to  be 
reading  by  relative  pi  fch. 

Does  not  a  singer  read  by  having  the  characteristics  of  a 
pitch  in  his  mind  when  he  sees  its  sign,  instead  of  re¬ 
membering  a  line  or  space,  or  computing  a  distance?  In 
other  words,  is  it  not  the  mental  effect  of  tones,  as  the  tonic- 
solfaists  call  it,  by  which  we  are  guided  ?  For  instance,  when 
we  see  the  sign  of  five  of  a  major  key,  does  not  the  _pecul- 
iar  dominant  character  of  that  pitch  come  to  our  minds,  or 
if  it  is  the  plaintive  six,  or  the  restless  seven,  or  the  repose¬ 
ful  home-tone — is  it  not  its  mental  effect  in  each  case  that  is 
our  guide?  Analyze  it  in  your  own  case  and  see.  Of  course 
this  would  not  apply  to  beginners.  They  have  first  to  learn 
the  mental  effect  of  each  tone  of  a  key — an  interesting  and 
useful  work,  easily  done. 


76 


don’t.” 


No.  33.  PULSE  AND  TONE-COLOR. 

Ordinarily,  in  each  pulse-group,  especially  in  the  smaller  clusters,  there  is 
one  pulse  which  stands  out  more  prominently  in  the  mind  as  the  principal 
pulse  of  that  group. 

WE  have  long  been  in  the  habit  of  defining  beats  as 
mental  pulsations,  and  have  long  used  “pulse ’’and 
“pulsations”  as  good  stepping-stones  to  the  ultimate  word. 
Why  Mr.  Curwen  substitutes  the  word  “pulse”  for  “beat”  I 
do  not  know,  unless  it  was  to  mark  a  distinction  between 
the  real  beats  of  music  and  the  motions  of  the  hand  or  baton 
which  manifest  them.  If  so,  it  is  an  entirely  unnecessary 
proceeding,  for  there  is  no  more  confusion  in  using  the  word 
“beat”  for  both  things,  than  the  word  “crescendo”  for  a  cer¬ 
tain  dynamic  effect  and  for  the  two  diverging  lines  which 
\  constitute  its  sign,  and  there  are  many  other  cases  in  music 
where  one  word  serves  as  the  name  of  the  thing  and  its  sign 
without  the  least  confusion.  “Pulse”  is  a  good  word  and 
means  the  right  thing,  but  is  no  better  than  “beat.”  Not¬ 
withstanding  the  small  “don’t ’’attached  to  this  (only  because 
it  introduces  an  unnecessary  word  into  our  system)  it  may 
prevail — time  will  show.  It  is  universally  used  by  the  sol- 
faists  in  England,  where  it  originated,  and  they  are  so  great 
a  power  that  whatever  they  do  is  sure  to  have  a  large  fol¬ 
lowing. 

“Tone-color”  is  much  affected  by  some  teachers  and  writ¬ 
ers.  It  is  a  picturesque  expression,  and  there  is  no  more  harm 
in  applying  the  word  “color”to  tone  than  in  applying  the 
word  “tone”  to  color  in  a  picture,  if  we  needed  to  do  so,  but 
we  do  not.  “Quality” is  what  is  meant,  and  is  a  far  better 
word  for  classification  and  clear  distinction.  “Clear  qual¬ 
ity,”  “somber  quality,”  “sympathetic  quality,”  etc.,  convey 
much  more  forcibly  the  ideas  wanted  than  “clear  color,” 
“somber  color,”  “sympathetic  color,”  etc. 


DOUBLE  SHARP  AND  DOUBLE  FLAT. 


V7 


Possibly  in  describing  the  effect  of  a  large  orchestra  the 
word  “color/’  or  “coloring,”  might  help,  but  1  do  not  see 
why  “quality  ”  would  not  always  be  more  definite  when  we 
come  down  to  particulars.  It  is  a  pretty  word,  and  seekers 
for  novelty  will  naturally  be  attracted  by  it. 


No.  34.  DOUBLE  SHARP  AND  DOUBLE  ELAT. 


If  we  wish  to  make  any  degree  of  the  staff  represent  a  tone  one  full  step 
above  its  natural  tone,  what  character  do  we  use  ? 
double  sharp.’’ 

And  if  the  same  distance  below,  what  character  ? 
double  flat.” 

HE  above  is  totally  misleading.  Here  are  the  facts: 


1  The  double  sharp  is  a  device  to  sharp  a  degree  of  the 
staff  already  sharped,  or  that  would  be  sharped  if  the  signa¬ 
ture  were  given  where  it  is  used.  The  double  flat  is  a  de¬ 
vice  to  flat  a  degree  of  the  staff  already  flatted,  or  that 
would  be  flatted  if  the  signature  were  given,  etc. 

It  is  certain  that  if  there  had  never  been  any  occasion  for 
sharping  a  line  or  space  already  sharped,  ther&  never  would 
have  been  a  double  sharp;  and  if  there  had  never  been  a 
need  for  flatting  a  degree  already  flatted,  there  never  would 
have  been  a  double  flat.  The  idea  that  the  double  sharp 
and  double  flat  were  invented  to  change  the  meaning  of  a 
natural  degree  of  the  staff  a  whole  step  at  once  is  utterly 
subversive  of  all  accepted  ideas  of  tone  relationship  and  rep¬ 
resentation,  as  I  think  1  can  show. 

Every  tone  properly  used  in  music  stands  in  key  relation¬ 
ship  to  its  neighbors.  It  is  either  a  diatonic  or  regular  mem¬ 
ber  of  the  key  that  is  being  used,  or  it  is  a  chromatic  or 
temporary  member.  In  a  major  key  it  is  either  one  or  sharp 


78 


“  don’t.” 


one,  two,  or  sharp  two,  or  flat  two,  three,  or  flat  three,  and 
so  on  up  to  seven,  or  flat  seven.  It  must  be  one  of  these 
pitches.  There  are  no  such  things  as  double  sharp  one, 
double  flat  three,  etc.  There  is  no  such  a  thing  as  double 
sharping  or  double  flatting  in  the  sense  of  changing  the 
meaning  of  a  degree  a  step,  where  the  pitches  of  a  key  are 
futty  represented. 

There  are  two  ways  of  representing  keys  on  the  staff,  one 
by  a  signature,  and  the  other  by  accidentals;  but  observe 
the  important  difference  between  the  two  ways:  When  the 
key  is  represented  by  a  signature  all  its  regular  members  are 
shown,  whether  they  are  wanted  or  not,  but  when  the  key 
is  represented  by  accidentals,  only  those  tones  of  the  key 
that  are  wanted  are  shown,  the  others  have  to  be  “  under¬ 
stood.” 

Take  the  following  example  for  illustration,  where  a  mod¬ 
ulation  goes  from  the  key  of  C  to  the  key  of  E : 


F-sharp  is  not  shown  there  because  it  is  not  wanted,  but  it 
is  there  potentially,  and  is  in  the  musician’s  mind  as  two  of 
the  key  of  E,  so  when  he  sees  the  double  sharp  he  knows  it 
is  the  orderly  way  to  represent  the  sharp  two  that  the  music 
requires.  Ele  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  F-natural  in  that 
modulation.  It  is  not  in  existence  for  him. 

To  think  of  F-natural,  which  is  not  diatonic  there  because 
it  is  in  the  signature  at  the  beginning,  or  to  think  of  it  be¬ 
cause  it  is  flat  two  in  the  key  in  which  the  modulation  is, 


DOUBLE  SHARP  AND  DOUBLE  FLAT.  79 

and  that  the  oftice  of  the  double  sharp  is  to  “double  sharp” 
it,  and  so  change  the  meaning  of  that  degree  a  step  at  once 
to  get  the  sharp  two,  would  be  a  folly  that  we  can  hardly 
conceive  of  in  a  person  with  any  musical  knowledge  at  all. 

Custom,  as  is  seen  above,  permits  the  staff  to  make  false 
representations  in  modulations.  Observe  right  in  the  midst 
of  the  key  of  E  (four  sharps)  F-natural  and  C-natural  ap¬ 
pear  as  diatonic  degrees  (according  to  signature).  This  they 
are  not  at  that  point,  so  the  staff  there  makes  a  false  repre¬ 
sentation. 

Just  so  whenever  .the  double  sharp  or  double  flat  appears 
on  a  natural  degree,  a  false  representation  is  made.  Why.? 
Because,  practically,  the  double  sharp  and  double  flat  are  al¬ 
ways  used  for  chromatic  tones,  and  a  chromatic  tone  is  never 
truly  represented  in  any  other  way  than  by  sharping  or  flat¬ 
ting  a  diatonic  degree.  Thus  a  natural  line  or  space  can  not 
be  where  those  “  double”  characters  are  used,  and  it  ought 
not  to  be  so  thought  of,  even  if  the  key  in  which  they  oc¬ 
cur  is  not  “expressed”  but  has  to  be  “understood.” 

Here  the  staff  makes  a  true  representation  of  the  above 
musical  strain : 


It  just  occurs  to  me  that  the  word  “double  sharp”  may 
mislead  some  by  causing  them  to  think  that  it  means  sharp¬ 
ing  twice.  It  means  no  such  thing.  It  is  simply  a  name 
given  to  a  character  that  sharps  once,  like  any  other  sharp, 
but  it  has  a  different  name  from  the  other  sharp  and  a  differ- 


8o 


don’t.” 


ent  appearance  because  of  its  peculiar  office.  If  it  appears 
to  sharp  twice,  it  is  like  the  sun’s  rising,  an  apparent  truth, 
but  not  a  real  truth ;  and  it  is  so  because  of  the  nonrepresen¬ 
tation  on  the  staffs  of  all  the  tones  of  the  keys  in  which  the 

double  sharp  occurs,  as  I  have  shown.  So,  of  the  appear- 

0 

ance  that  the  double  flat  flats  twice,  the  same  general  prin¬ 
ciple  holds  true. 

The  double  sharp  can  not  be  used  in  the  keys  of  C,  G,  and 
D.  It  first  finds  a  place  in  A  major  (three  sharps)  where  it 
can  be  used  only  in  representing  sharp  six.  In  E  major  it  is 
used  for  sharp  two  and  sharp  six;  in  B  major  for  sharp  two, 
sharp  five,  and  sharp  six,  and  so  on.  It  is  not  used  to  rep¬ 
resent  a  diatonic  tone  in  any  major  key  in  common  use. 
The  first  one  in  which  it  could  be  so  used  is  G-sharp  (eight 
sharps),  where  F  double  sharp  would  be  seven. 

As  a  diatonic  tone  it  would,  of  course,  be  represented  in 
the  signature  place. 

I  have  never  seen  this  key  used  in  music,  but  building  up 
its  signature  in  the  orderly  way  shows  in  a  clear  and  pleas¬ 
ant  fashion  the  true  use  of  the  double  sharp.  First  the  seven 
natural  degrees  are  sharped,  and  then  the  first  degree  that 
was  sharped  must  be  sharped  again,  thus: 


Observe  the  signature  is  built  up  Ty  gradually  adding 
sharps,  and  when  it  comes  to  the  double  sharp,  that  is  add¬ 
ed  precisely  as  the  others  are,  and  with  the  same  effect,  for 
it  is  not  tico  sharps,  but  one.  It  is  made  peculiarly,  and 
named  peculiarly,  because  its  office  is  to  sharp  another  sharp 
(so  to  speak). 

Going  on  to  nine  sharps,  ten  sharps,  eleven  sharps,  etc., 


DOUBLE  SHARP  AND  DOUBLE  FLAT.  8l 

would  be  but  sharping  again  others  of  the  already  sharped 
degrees  of  the  staff.  If  anyone  thinks,  after  he  has  placed 
the  seven  sharps,  that  he  could  take  away  the  first  one  and 
substitute  a  double  sharp,  and  so  make  that  degree  of  the 
staff  represent  a  pitch  a  step  higher  to  begin  with,  he  would 
make  a  grave  mistake.  Such  a  proceeding  would  entirely 
subvert  the  beautiful  order  of  our  signature  system. 

The  first  minor  key  in  which  this  pitch  could  appear  as  a 
diatonic  tone  is  G-sharp  minor  (five  sharps),  where  F  double 
sharp  is  seven;  but  it  will  be  observed  that  that  degree  is 
already  sharped  in  the  signature  place. 

In  conclusion,  in  all  the  major  keys  in  common  use, 
wherever  there  is  a  pitch  named  with  the  word  ''double 
sharp,'’ it  is  chromatic,  and  there  is  a  diatonic  pitch  a  half 
step  below  it,  and  wherever  there  is  a  pitch  named  with  the 
word  "double  flat,’'  it  is  chromatic,  and  there  is  a  diatonic 
pitch  a  half  step  above  it.  This  is  true  whatever  may  be  the 
staff  representation. 

A  good  deal  of  discussion  has  recently  taken  place  regard¬ 
ing  the  compound  characters  that  always  follow  the  double 
sharp  and  double  flat  (t[^,  tjb).  It  began  by  the  statement 
that  those  characters  had  no  names,  and  has  been  continued 
by  the  effort  to  find  one  for  each  that  would  be  satisfactory. 
1  will  not  discuss  the  merits  of  the  names  which  have  been 
proposed  because  I  am  satisfied  that  a  plan  which  has  been 
suggested  by  at  least  three  teachers  of  prominence  will,  if 
adopted,  do  away  with  the  present  awkward  form  of  the 
characters  and  render  new  names  unnecessary. 

The  plan  is  to  let  a  sharp  alone  follow  the  double  sharp, 
and  a  flat  alone  follow  the  double  flat  as  a  means  of  chang¬ 
ing  back  the  line  or  space  affected  to  its  diatonic  condition. 

At  first  I  thought  that  plan  would  not  do,  it  seemed  so 
simple,  but  reflection  convinces  me  that  it  would  work  per¬ 
fectly  well.  Let  me  illustrate : 


82 


“don't. 


)  > 


Three,  five,  jif  five,  six,  five,  three,  one,  two,  three. 

Mi,  sol,  si,  la,  sol,  mi,  do,  re,  mi. 


There  can  be  no  doubt  as  to  what  that  second  accidental 
means.  A  natural  before  it  would  not  make  it  more  clear; 
on  the  contrary,  it  would  give  it  a  confused  look.  A  natu¬ 
ral  there  is  as  unnecessary  as  in  the  changing  of  a  signature. 
It  is  far  simpler  just  to  let  one  signature  displace  another 
without  the  intervention  of  naturals. 

Here  the  naturals  are  used: 


T 

\J  .1  1  ,  .1 

-TT-  - 

n 

n  ^ — r 

^ 

# 

0  # 

.im  ^  # 

L  ^ 

* 

T3T7  ^  r 

Mi, 

do. 

ti,  ■ 

do. 

do,  do. 

Mi, 

do,  re. 

mi. 

r-fr-rl-i 

fS - - - ^r-n 

0 

^  0  ^ 

,  1  • 

. .  ^  0  ^ 

f  W - ■  - w 

s  L  r.  . 

W  '  W 

...  1, \ 

S'  ^  1 

r  L 

I 

i: 

1 

Ke,  mi,  re. 

do,  sol,  mi, 

1 

re,  mi,  re, 

do. 

Here  the  naturals  are  dispensed  with: 


- 1 — 

“1  -  — n 

— q— 

- ^ -  1 

1  1 

r? i 

rm  ^  4  1  *  0 

0  9  9 

S^  1 

'L  l  4  t  • 

mJ 

~  3 

Sad  -  ly  the  wTnds  in  the  dark  fo-rests  sigh. 


44 

Li 

-4  «  - 

^ ^ ^ — 

^  h - * 

— 9 - ^ - 0 — 

While  o’er  the  mea-dows  the  light  breez-es  fly. 


Whether  this  arrangement  be  considered  entirely  arbitrary, 
or  whether  the  clef  may  be  considered  as  ending  the  effect 
of  the  previous  signature,  by  no  possibility  can  the  plan 
cause  any  misunderstanding  or  confusion. 


KLANG,  KEY  GROUP,  AND  A  CENTRAL  KEY. 


83 


So  with  the  sharp  after  the  double  sharp,  and  the  flat  after 
the  double  flat;  but  a  curious  fact  is  shown  in  connection 
with  those  characters.  Every  accidental  simply  changes  the 
meaning  of  the  line  or  space  on  which  it  is  placed  a  half  step 
if  the  key  is  represented;  that  is,  it  only  sharps  or  flats. 
We  are  accustomed  to  the  fact  that  the  natural  does  some¬ 
times  one  and  sometimes  the  other,  but  here  the  sharp 
which  follows  the  double  sharp  flats,  and  the  flat  which  fol¬ 
lows  the  double  flat  sharps. 

1  hope  these  plans  will  be  adopted,  that  we  may  get  rid  of 
those  awkward  compound  characters  ;  then  if  the  double 
flat  can  be  madd  into  one  character  as  the  double  sharp  is, 
the  whole  matter  will  be  in  better  form. 


No.  35.  KLANG,  KEY  GROUP,  AND 
A  CENTRAL  KEY. 

MODERN  author  suggests  the  German  word  klang  as 


/V  a  substitute  for  ''tone,’’  because,  as  he  says,  "it  ex¬ 
presses  more  fully  what  we  hear  in  the  compound  of  ele¬ 
mentary  or  partial  tones  which  collectively  constitute  a  mu¬ 
sical  tone.” 

It  is  self-evident  that  whatever  constitutes  a  "tone”  is 
included  in  the  meaning  of  that  word.  If,  in  our  musical 
work,  there  were  need  of  making  more  prominent  the  idea 
of  the  partial  tones,  or  overtones,  or  harmonics  of  which  a 
tone  is  composed  I  can  see  that  the  suggestion  would  have 
some  force;  but  that  is  not  the  case,  and  I  fail  to  see  where, 
in  his  after  writing,  this  author  uses  the  word  klang  that 
"tone”  would  not  have  fully  expressed  what  he  wished  to 
say.  A  sentence  or  two  from  a  paragraph  a  little  farther  on 
in  his  work  confirms  my  point 


84 


“don’t.” 


In  music  a  klang  is  always  thought  and  heard  in  connection  with  other 
klangs,  and,  therefore,  always  occurs  in  some  positive  relation  which  deter¬ 
mines  its  exact  pitch,  and  gives  it  definite  character  or  meaning.  A  separate 
tone  is  a  tone  out  of  relation,  and  means  nothing  musically.  Music  at  all 
moments  occurs  in  some  one  key,  hence  the  primal  relation  of  a  tone  is  its  key 
relation.  Thus  a  tone  has  no  definite  character  in  the  mind  until  it  is  rela- 
tioned  as  a  hey-klaug. 

Rend  “tone”  for  klang,  “tones”  for  klangs,  and  “tone 
of  a  kev”  for  kcy-klang,  and  you  will  get  the  full  meaning  of 
the  true  and  excellent  statement  which  is  here  made. 

This  author  uses  “key-group”  for  key.  Since  a  “key” 
is  “a  family  of  related  tones”  it  is  of  course  a  kind  of 
“group,”  but  it  is  not  necessary  to  say  either  “  key-kimily  ” 
or  “key-group,”  for  the  word  “key”  alone  means  all  of  rela¬ 
tionship  that  either  word  implies.  Were  it  desirable  to  add 
a  word  to  “key”  to  further  indicate  its  meaning,  “family” 
would  be  far  more  suggestive  of  relationship  than  “group.” 

Where  a  person  thinks  that  “key”  and  “key-note”  or 
“key-tone”  mean  about  the  same  thing,  “key-family”  or 
“key-group”  would  in  his  mind  have  some  “reason  to  be,” 
but  this  author  does  not  think  so,  judging  from  the  follow¬ 
ing  questions: 

How  many  klangs  are  there  in  a  key?  What  are  the  relative  positions  oi 
the  Tonic  and  the  remaining  key  klangs? 

Beside  the  seven  principals,  a  key  group  contains  what  I  call  the  Ten  Pri¬ 
mary  Intermediates. 

Then  follow  the  names  of  the  diatonic  and  chromatic 
pitches  that  constitute  the  key  of  C  major. 

The  tones  thus  specified  do  not  complete  the  full  number  of  tones  that  occur 
in  a  single  tone-stratum.  There  are  ten  other  tones  in  a  stratum,  which  I  call 
the  Ten  Secondary  Intermediates. 

Then  follow  their  names,  thus:  g^,  hi^,  c^,  e^,  f^, 
bj?!?,  c\},  fj?.  (Why  d^  and  dj?[?  are  left  out  does  not 
appear.)  -  - 


KLANG,  KEY  GROUP,  AND  A  CENTRAL  KEY. 


85 


Thus  a  single  tone-stratum  contains  twenty-seven  tones  in  all,  namely,  the 
seven  principals,  the  ten  primary  intermediates,  and  tlie  ten  secondary  inter¬ 
mediates.  When  I  speak  of  a  full  tone  stratum  it  will  bj  understood  that 
these  twenty-seven  tones  are  referred  to  as  a  unit. 

Middle  C  is  the  central  tone  of  the  system. 

The  natural  key  of  C  is  the  central  key  of  the  system. 

Every  key  centers  in  and  radiates  from  the  central  stratum.  Thus  the 
twenty-seven  tones  in  the  central  stratum  are  twenty-seven  Tonic  centers  of 
twenty-seven  keys. 

Many  of  these  keys  are  not  employed,  owing  to  their  complex  notation. 


If  1  understand  this  author,  his  “primary  intermediates’' 
are  simply  the  chromatic  tones  of  a  key.  If  so,  what  he  calls 
“secondary  intermediates*’ are  nothing  more.  All  the  pitches 
so  named  are  simply  the  “primary  intermediates”  or  chro¬ 
matic  tones  of  certain  keys.  The  following  statement  will 
treat  the  whole  subject  more  fully: 

Every  tone  in  music  has  a  name  which  describes  it  as 
a  separate  tone — independent  of  relationship,  and  a  name 
which  describes  it  in  its  relation  to  other  tones.  The  former 
is  called  its  absolute  name  and  the  latter  its  relative  name. 
The  absolute  names  of  tones  are  the  same  as  the  names  of 
certain  letters  with,  in  some  cases,  the  addition  of  the  word 
sharp,  flat,  double  sharp,  or  double  flat.  Relative  names  are 
tonic,  dominant,  key-tone,  one,  three,  do,  sol,  sharp  four,  flat 
seven,  and  names  of  that  kind. 

Following  are  all  the  independent  or  absolute  pitch  names  in 
use :  A,  A#,  A[7,  A^,  A^b,  B,  B#,  B[7,  C,  C#,  C^,  Ct^,  D,  D#, 
D^,  Dt^,  E,  E#,  Ei,,  £[,[7,  F,  F#,  F^,  G,  G#,.  G^,  G[7, 
G\^\^ — thirty-one  in  all.  (Observe,  these  spoken  names  are 
not  letters,  and  the  letters  which  are  their  written  names 
are  not  here  used  as  the  names  of  letters.  See  No.  2  for  a 
fuller  explanation.)  All  these  tones  are  precisely  alike  in 
their  capacity  for  being  diatonic  or  chromatic,  or,  in  other 
words,  principals  or  intermediates.  Those  named  with  the 
words  double  sharp  and  double  flat  are  not  used  and  repre- 


86 


don’t/' 

sented  as  diatonic  tones  for  the  reason  that  the  same  results 
can  be  reached  by  a  simpler  notation,  but  there  is  nothing 
in  the  nature  of  such  tones  to  prevent  such  use.  The  scale 
or  any  other  melody  can  be  sung  with  C  double  sharp  for 
key-tone  as  easily  as  with  C  or  D.  In  many  keys  in  use 
C-sharp  is  a  chromatic  or  intermediate  tone.  In  just  as 
many  C  is  chromatic  or  intermediate,  and  so  with  all  the 
other  tones  excepting  those  named  with  the  words  double 
sharp  or  double  flat. 

It  follows  that  all  the  tones  in  common  use  are  equal  in 
respect  to  prominence  or  lack  of  prominence.  No  set  takes 
precedence  over  another  set  permanently.  All  take  turns  in 
being  principals,  and  all  take  turns  in  being  intermediates. 
Those  named  with  the  words  “sharp”  and  “flat,”  as  A- 
sharp,  B-tlat,  etc.,  are  just  as  often  principals  as  those  with 
the  shorter  names.  Look  through  the  keys  of  G,  D,  A,  E, 
B,  F,  B-flat,  E-flat,  A-llat,  D-flat,  and  G-flat,  and  notice  which 
are  principals,  and  which  intermediates;  or,  to  use  the  scien¬ 
tific  terms,  which  are  diatonic  tones  and  which  chromatic. 

A  key  can  be  fully  and  clearly  manifested  by  its  seven 
regular  members,  or  diatonic  tones,  but  it  may  have  other 
temporary  members  (chromatic  tones)  which,  when  used, 
take  their  place  in  the  family  having  names  given  them  which 
describe  their  relationship.  Here  are  the  names  of  all — per¬ 
manent  and  temporary;  in  other  words,  diatonic  and  chro¬ 
matic  of  a  key:  one,  sharp  one,  two,  sharp  two,  three,  four, 
sharp  four,  five,  sharp  five,  six,  sharp  six,  seven,  flat  seven, 
Hat  six,  flat  five,  flat  three,  and  flat  two. 

From  the  thirty-one  independent  tones,  whose  names  are 
given  above,  all  the  keys  in  common  use  are  made.  Take 
any  one  of  the  independent  pitches  (excepting  those  named 
with  the  words  “double  sharp”  and  “double  flat)  for  key- 
tone  and  notice  what  will  make  “sharp  one,”  “two,” 
“sharp  two,”  etc.,  “seven,”  “flat  seven,”  etc.  You  will 


klang,  key  group,  and  a  central  key.  87 

notice  that  no  pitch  named  with  the  word  ‘‘double  sharp’- 
will  come  into  the  major  keys  of  C,  G,  and  D,  and  no  pitch 
named  with  the  word  “double  flat”  will  come  into  the  major 
keys  of  C,  F,  and  B-flat.  These  keys  will  be  full  and  com¬ 
plete  with  all  their  diatonic  and  chromatic  members  without 
the  pitches  named  with  the  word  “  double.”  The  first  major 
key  in  which  a  “double  sharp”  will  occur  will  be  A,  and 
the  first  in  which  a  double  flat  will  occur  will  be  E-flat. 

If  one  could  find  a  tone  that  is  midway  in  the  great  scale 
of  tones,  from  the  highest  to  the  lowest,  appreciable  by  human 
ears,  that  might  be  called  the  central  tone  of  the  system  ;  but 
as  ears  vary  in  their  power  to  discover  the  property  of  pitch 
(that  which  distinguishes  a  tone  from  other  sounds  or  noises) 
in  extremely  high  and  low  tones,  it  would  be  difficult  to  come 
to  an  agreement;  and  if  found,  it  would  have  no  significance 
for  musical  purposes.  It  would  be  precisely  like  its  neigh¬ 
bors  in  its  capacity  for  use. 

Since  every  key  includes  the  highest  and  lowest  tones 
usable,  all  are  alike  in  extent  or  compass;  and  no  one  can 
be  central  in  the  sense  that  the  others  are  around  it,  or 
emanate  or  radiate  from  it. 

In  studying  keys  in  connection  with  our  system  of  nota¬ 
tion,  C  is  taken  first,  simply  because  its  notation  is  the  sim¬ 
plest,  and  not  because  it  is  more  central,  or  simple,  or  natural; 
certainly  not  because  it  is  the  primary  key,  the  others  eman¬ 
ating  from  it  as  secondary  keys. 

Let  me  repeat:  There  are  thirty-one  independent  pitches 
extending  by  their  octaves  to  the  utmost  bound  of  pitch  per¬ 
ception.  All  major  keys  made  from  this  material  will  be 
found  exactly  alike  in  structure  and  importance. 


No.  36.  STAFF  SPACES. 


No.  36  is  an  endeavor  to  make  more  clear  some  points  which  did  not  re¬ 
ceive  sufficient  illustration  in  No.  1,  judging  by  what  has  been  said  on  the 
subject  since  that  article  was  writ'^en  and  printed  in  the  Musical  Visitor,  a 
year  or  two  ago. 

The  dialogue  form  is  chosen,  that  both  sides  may  be  fairly  stated. 

Some  repetition  is  unavoidable  in  bringing  up  the  old  points  for  fresh  illus¬ 
tration. 


HIS  is  a  subject  which,  like  Banquo’s  ghost,  '‘will  not 


1  down.”  Teachers  continue  to  discuss  it,  and  write 
about  it  in  the  musical  papers  with  as  much  ardor,  appar¬ 
ently,  as  when  it  was  first  broached,  although,  as  yet,  they 
do  not  seem  to  be  in  sight  of  an  agreement.  Here  is  a  con-- 
versation,  having  this  subject  for  its  theme,  which  may  be  of 
some  use,  as  it  brings  up  some  new  points,  or  rather  treats 
some  old  points  in  a  new  way. 

A  begins  by  saying:  “Common  space  is  everywhere — 
on  the  surface  of  a  sheet  of  paper,  on  a  board,  on  a  wall,  on 
the  ground,  in  the  air,  in  short,  all  around  us,  but  there  is  no 
musical  space  until  a  horizontal  line  is  made.  Take  this 
sheet  of  blank  paper  and  draw  a  horizontal  line  in  the  center 
of  it  thus,  and  some  of  the  common  space  that  was  on  the 
paper  is  turned  into  two  musical  spaces.” 

B :  “By  what  authority  do  you  say  that  that  line  has  turned 
common  space  into  musical  space?” 

A:  “The  universal  usage  of  musicians,  who  say  that  with 
one  line  there  are  three  places  on  which  to  write  notes:  on 
the  line  and  above  and  below  it,  and  two  of  these  places  are 
spaces — musical  spaces  if  notes  are  written  upon  them.” 

B:  “How  much  common  space  is  turned  into  these  mu¬ 
sical  spaces,  as  you  call  them?” 

A:  “That  depends  upon  how  large  the  note  is  to  be  that 
is  to  be  used.  The  strip  of  musical  space  which  the  line 
makes  must  be  wide  enough  to  hold  the  note  well.” 


STAFF  SPACES. 


89 


B :  ‘  ‘  But  there  is  no  boundary  on  one  side  of  that  space  to 
show  where  the  musical  space  leaves  off  and  the  common 
space  begins.” 

A:  '‘That  is  not  important — you  can  tell  near  enough. 
You  will  see  exactly  how  wide  the  outside  spaces  are  as 
soon  as  you  have  two  lines,  for  the  outside  spaces  will  be 
just  the  size  of  the  space  between  the  lines.  Then,  as  you 
go  on  building  up  the  Istaff,  each  new  line  places  a  visible 
boundary  where  the  mental  boundary  was.  The  lines  you 
use  are  continually  turning  strips  of  common  space  into  mu¬ 
sical  space,  and  that  process  goes  on  just  the  same  when 
you  enlarge  the^staff  with  short  lines,  ending  always  with 
the  kind  of  space  with  which  you  began.” 

B:  “But  what  right  have  you  to  say  that  the  space  just 
outside  of  the  outer  line  belongs  to  the  line.^” 

A:  “Why,  the  line  creates  it.  It  is  never  there  without 
the  line,  it  is  always  there  with  the  line.  How  two  things 
can  belong  to  each  other  more  than  they  do  1  can’t  imagine.” 

B:  “Then  you  would  argue  that  if  the  line  belongs  to  the 
staff,  the  space  it  creates  belongs  to  the  staff  also.” 

A:  “Certainly;  that  is  the  natural  and  rational  deduction 
from  the  facts.” 

B:  “Well,  let  me  state  the  case  as  a  majority  of  musical 
people  view  it:  with  one  line,  no  space;  with  two  lines,  one 
space;  with  three  lines,  two  spaces;  with  four  lines,  three 
spaces;  and  with  five  lines,  four.  That  constitutes  the  entire 
staff,  outside  of  which  there  are  no  staff  lines  and  spaces.” 

A:  “What  are  they  called  then — the  outside  places  that 
musicians  use  to  write  notes  upon?” 

B:  “Added  lines  and  spaces.” 

A:  “Added  to  what?” 

B:  “To  the  staff.” 

A:  “Added  to  the  staff,  but  do  not  become  a  part  of  it.” 

B:  “Why,  yes,  1  suppose  that  is  the  way  it  is.” 


90 


‘‘don’t.” 


A:  “Is  the  space  next  above  the  fifth  line  an  added 
space 

B:  “Really,  no,  but  theoretically,  yes.  That  is,  we  agree 
that  the  staff  shall  end  with  the  line,  and  so  we  class  that 
space  with  the  short  lines  and  spaces.” 

A:  “Then  that  is  the  first  added  space  above.” 

B:  “Well,  we  don’t  say  ‘added  space  above,’  but  simply 
‘space  above.’” 

A:  “But  you  call  the  first  space  that  is  really  added  the 
second  added  space,  do  you  not?” 

B:  “Yes.” 

A:  “Well,  if  there  is  a  second  added  space,  there  must  be 
a  first.  Which  is  it?” 

B:  “1  see  what  you  are  driving  at,  but  what’s  the  harm? 
Can’t  people  play,  or  sing,  or  read  music  just  as  well  while 
taking  this  common  view  of  the  subject?” 

A:  “Yes;  but  are  you  contented,  for  purposes  of  teaching 
and  for  the  credit  of  our  system  as  a  science,  that  our  theory 
should  be  complicated  where  it  might  be  simple,  contrary 
to  the  usages  of  musicians  where  it  might  be  in  agreement 
with  them,  and  false  where  it  might  just  as  easily,  yes,  much 
more  easily,  be  true?” 

B:  “That  is  a  severe  arraignment  of  the  statements  1  have 
made,  if  you  apply  it  to  them.” 

A:  “1  do.  Taking  the  points  in  the  order  of  their  men¬ 
tion,  which  is  more  complicated  and  puzzling  and  which 
more  reasonable  and  clear  of  the  following  statements? 
Here  is  the  first:  ‘Write  a  scale  upward,  beginning  on  the 
middle  line  of  the  staff,  and  you  go  beyond  the  staff  into 
something  that  is  not  the  staff — lines  and  spaces,  to  be  sure, 
but  they  do  not  belong  to  the  staff — added  to  the  staff,  to  be 
sure,  but  not  so  added  as  to  become  a  part  of  the  staff.’ 

“That,  to  the  clear  mind  of  a  child  or  the  trained  mind  of 
a  scientist,  would  be  like  saying:  A  man  found  he  needed 


STAFF  SPACES. 


91 


more  rooms  in  his  house,  so  he  added  a  story  to  it;  but  he 
said  the  story  he  had  added  did  not  belong  to  the  house. 
He  could  go  up  into  the  rooms  that  had  been  added,  but 
they  were  not  a  part  of  the  house.” 

B,  laughing:  “He  could  use  the  rooms  just  as  well  as  if 
he  had  said  they  were  a  part  of  the  house.” 

A:  “Yes,  but  his  neighbors  would  consider  him  crazy, 
all  the  same.” 

“Now  the  other  statement :  ‘You  write  a  scale  upward, 
beginning  with  the  third  line  of  the  staff.  You  find  the  or¬ 
dinary  five-line  staff  is  not  large  enough,  so  you  add  a  line 

to  it  to  enlarge  it,  only  you  use  a  short  line  because  more 

% 

long  lines  would  confuse  the  eye.  When  you  have  written 
it,  your  scale  is  entirely  on  the  staff,  not  a  part  of  it  on  and 
a  part  off.  When  the  man  wanted  more  rooms,  he  simply 
enlarged  his  house.’” 

B:  “Then  the  staff  may  have  six,  seven,  or  eight,  or  more 
lines.” 

A:  “Certainly.” 

B:  “Supposing  you  enlarge  the  staff  downward  by  add¬ 
ing  three  lines,  the  lowest  line  would  be  the  first  line  of 
the  staff,  wouldn’t  it.^” 

A:  “Yes,  but  that  would  not  be  its  name.  Its  staff-name 
would  be  the  ‘third  line  below.’  The  names  of  the  lines 
and  spaces  would  never  vary,  though  the  staff'  may,  or,  1 
should  say,  is  constantly  varying  in  size. 

“Now  to  the  next  point:  You  make  the  statement  that  the 
staff  has  no  space  outside  of  the  five  lines.  The  child  and 
the  scientist,  standing  by,  see  the  musician  put  the  sharp  of 
a  signature  on  one  of  the  outer  spaces  and  then  write  notes 
on  both  of  them,  just  as  he  does  on  the  inner  ones,  and  the 
child,  who  thinks  sharps  and  notes  must  be  written  on  the 
staff,  says:  ‘What  is  he  putting  things  out  there  for,  if  that 
is  not  a  part  of  the  staff. It  is  all  strange  and  puzzling  to 


92 


don’t.” 


him,  but  the  scientist  says  promptly :  ‘  Here,  your  theory  and 
practice  do  not  agree;  you  must*  either  take  those  outer 
spaces  into  the  staff  or  quit  using  them,  if  you  wish  your 
science  to  be  consistent.’  Then  you  reply:  ‘Can’t  we  use 
those  spaces  when  we  need  to,  and  still  consider  that  they 
do  not  belong  to  the  staff. 

“B:  M^erhaps  you  can.  Musicians  seem  to  be  able  to  do 
extraordinary  things  in  that  way,  but  why  you  should  adopt 
so  far-fetched  and  unreasonable  a  theory  to  get  out  of  your 
dilemma  when  the  obvious  and  simple  one  is  at  your  hand 
1  can  not  imagine.  What  is  there  in  the  nature  of  the  case 
to  prevent  a  space  instead  of  a  line  from  being  the  outer 
degree  of  the  staff.^  Surely  the  universal  usage  of  musicians 
makes  that  appear  natural  and  reasonable,  and  what  violence 
is  done  to  reason  and  common  sense  to  consider  that  the 
staff  takes  in  all  the  lines  and  spaces  that  are  being  used — 
long  or  short 

A:  “Now,  per  contra,  you  make  the  other  statement: 
‘1'he  staff  includes  all  the  spaces  that  the  five  lines  make,  the 
two  outside  as  well  as  the  four  inside,  and  if  it  is  not  large 
enough  you  add  more  lines  and  spaces.  ’  Then  the  musician 
writes  where  he  pleases,  the  child  is  not  puzzled  by  any¬ 
thing  contradictory,  and  the  scientist  says:  ‘Now  you  are 
right.  That  statement  agrees  with  the  accepted  musical 
usage,  simplifies  the  whole  matter,  and  is  scientific  as  well 
as  rational.’ 

A:  “The  third  accusation  against  the  common  view  is 
’hat  it  calls  the  first  space  that  is  really  added  the  ‘second 
a  ided  space.’  The  child  says:  ‘Why  don’t  you  call  it  the 
first  added  space,  if  it  is  the  first The  scientist  says: 
‘What  kind  of  a  science  is  this  that  permits  such  a  falsity  on 
the  face  of  it.^’  And  he  retires  in  disgust.” 

B:  “Well,  how  would  you  remedy  it.^” 

A:  “The  way  is  most  simple  and  obvious,  and  has  bee 


STAFF  SPACES. 


93 

mentioned  many  times:  name  the  long  spaces  as  yon  do  the 
long  lines,  just  as  they  really  occur — first,  second,  third,  fourth, 
fifth,  sixth.  These  pertain  to  the  permanent  staff.  Then  the 
short  lines  and  spaces — the  occasional  visitors — exactly  as 
they  occur:  first  added  line,  first  added  space,  or,  better  still, 
omitting  the  word  ‘added,’  first  line  above,  first  space 
above,  second  line  above,  second  space  above  (or  below), 
etc.” 

B  :  “Above  what 

A:  “Do  you  expect  me  to  say  ‘above  the  staff  I  can’t 
do  that,  for  they  are  a  part  of  the  staff  whenever  they  are 
used,  ‘above’  or  ‘below,’  simply  indicating  the  direction 
in  which  the  staff  is  being  enlarged.” 

B:  “Such  a  change  in  naming  the  spaces  as  you  propose 
would  make  a  great  deal  of  trouble.” 

A:  “Only  to  those  who  have  the  false  naming  in  mind. 
Begmners  would  not  imagine  that  there  could  be  anv  other 
way,  if  they  are  taught  correctly  about  the  outer  spaces.” 

In  passing,  it  might  be  mentioned  that  Webster’s  defini¬ 
tion  of  “Staff”  is,  “The  five  lines  and  the  spaces  on  which 
music  is  written.”  This,  of  course,  includes  the  outer  spaces. 

1  hope  what  has  been  said  will  increase  the  number  who 
will  subscribe  to  the  following  statements: 

The  staff  is  an  aggregation  of  lines  and  spaces,  long  or 
short. 

There  is  no  such  thing  as  a  musical  line  or  space  out  of, 
or  separate  from,  a  staff.  It  is  only  a  musical  line  or  space 
by  virtue  of  being  a  part  of  a  staff. 

In  the  representation  of  a  piece  of  music,  a  note,  or  a  sharp, 
or  a  flat,  or  a  clef  has  no  signification,  unless  it  is  on  a  staff. 
Therefore,  wherever  one  of  these  characters  is,  there  is  a 
staff,  or  a  line  or  a  space  of  it. 


94 


“  don’t.” 


No.  37.  NATURAL  AND  CANCEL  AGAIN. 

Tliis  addition  to  No.  9  seems  to  be  required,  judging  by  the  correspondence 
on  this  subject  which  has  taken  place  since  that  article  was  written.  It  is 
hoped  that  this  will  be  a  satisfactory  explanation  of  the  points  in  question. 

I N  the  song  '‘1  Come  to  Thee,”  whether  in  the  lower  key 
1  or  the  higher,  the  singer,  who  reads  music  has  precisely 
the  same  thoughts  when  he  comes  to  the  sharp  four, 
whether  it  is  represented  by  the  sharp  or  by  the  natural. 

He  begins  by  seeing  what  the  signature  is,  and  that  being 
in  his  mind  he  does  not  look  back;  he  looks  ahead,  and  gives 
sharp  four  in  the  one  case  just  as  in  the  other,  simply 
because  it  is  sharp  four,  represented  differently  in  the  differ¬ 
ent  keys  in  accordance  with  the  orderly  laws  of  the  science. 
Here  is  the  example : 


1 


.Q — - - - - 

: >  n — 

-^4- 

1  I 

\  p 

' 

I 

1 

fm 

J  Li  J 

^  • 

'4 

• 

- - 0 

34^:4  5  8365 


I  come  to  thee  when  morn  -  ing  breaks, 
o 


— 

D  7  0  1  1  1 

0 

/ 

•  _ 1 _ 

0 

^  0  J  4  u4 

-T-,  ^ 1 

- 

1 

•  1 

3  4  5  8  3  6  5 

I  come  to  thee  when  morn  -  ing  breaks. 


To  teach  that  the  process  of  mind  should  be  different  in 
the  second  case  from  the  first  would  be  unscientific  and  un¬ 
true,  and  consequently  harmful  to  the  progress  of  the  learner. 

Since  it  is  a  fact  that  the  natural  in  the  second  case  acts 
like  a  sharp  (and  there  can  be  no  doubt  of  that),  it  is  much 
easier  to  banish  the  idea  of  naturalt\ins;  and  connect  the 
idea  of  sharping  the  word  “natural,”  than  to  banish  the 
idea  of  canceling  and  connect  sharping  with  the  word 
“cancel,”  but  that  would  have  to  be  done  if  “cancel”  were 


NATURAL  AND  CANCEL  AGAIN. 


95 


adopted.  That  there  is  no  canceling  done  by  the  natural 
that  is  not  done  by  the  other  accidentals  and  the  bar,  has 
been  many  times  shown.  In  fact,  there  is  no  ‘"canceling” 
done  by  any  musical  character  when  each  character  pro¬ 
duces  the  effect  wanted  and  continues  it  as  long  as  it  is 
wanted — stopping  only  when  a  new  effect  is  to  be  intro¬ 
duced.  To  think  of  that  character  as  making  the  degree  on 
which  it  is  placed  represent  a  pitch  a  half  step  higher  or  a 
half  step  lower  is  simplicity.  To  chink  of  it  as  undoing,  an¬ 
nulling,  or  effacing  something  that  has  been  done,  is  com¬ 
plexity,  as  well  as  falsity. 

P.  S.  Since  writing  the  above  this  occurs  to  me:  The 
sharp  in  the  first  example  makes  the  space  on  which  it  is 
placed  stand  for  F-sharp  as  far  as  the  bar.  There  the  bar 
acts  exactly  as  a  natural  would  if  it  were  placed  there 
instead  of  the  bar — the  measure  being  longer.  The  bar 
makes  the  space  stand  for  F  again — a  pitch  a  half  step 
lower.  So  in  the  next  example  the  natural  makes  the 
space  on  which  it  is  placed  stand  for  A  as  far  as  the  bar. 
There  the  bar  acts  exactly  as  a  flat  would  if  it  were  placed 
there.  It  makes  the  space  stand  for  A-flat  again — a  pitch  a 
half  step  lower.  Yet  I  think  no  one  will  say  that  the  bar 
does  any  canceling. 

The  following  example  will  make  this  more  clear.  A 
composer  writes  this  phrase,  for  instance.  He  thinks  of  it 
first  as  being  in  quadruple  measure: 

O 


zjt^N- 

A —  #  — — 

— # 

— j — 

— 5— 

Then  he  sees  that  it  is  not  properly  in  quadruple  measure, 
but  in  double,  and  he  writes  again: 

4 


 I] 

N  ^  l' 

j -- l-j 

fj  -  ij-  T  J 

“  ^  1 

m  -H 

i_  4  €  jind  5 

-0_ 0  J-l 

9  , 

m  0  »  -  . 

96 


''  don’t.” 

Now  the  bar  stops  those  two  spaces  from  representing 
F-sharp  and  D-sharp  and  makes  them  represent  F  and  D 
(pitches  a  half  step  lower),  exactly  as  the  naturals  do  in  the 
first  example,  but  it  does  no  canceling.  Each  measure  is 
exactly  what  is  wanted.  Nothing  is  effaced  or  annulled. 
The  bar  simply  stops  the  staff  from  representing  F-sharp  and 
D-sharp,  and  makes  it  represent  F  and  D.  If  continuing 
one  pitch  as  long  as  it  is  wanted  and  then  introducing  an¬ 
other  is  canceling,  then  the  sharp,  flat,  and  bar  do  it  just  as 
often  as  the  natural  does.  I  venture  to  say  that  those  who 
use  the  word  “cancel”  do  so  with  wrong  thoughts  about 
the  action  of  the  natural,  for,  as  is  said  above,  it  is  much 
harder  to  connect  the  true  idea  and  action  of  that  character 
with  the  word  “cancel”  than  with  the  word  “natural.” 

Probably  one  trouble  is  that  many  think  of  a  sharp,  flat,  or 
natural  as  belonging  to  a  note.  It  no  more  belongs  to  a  note 
than  a  bar  does.  It  affects  only  a  line  or  space — in  an  ex¬ 
tended  way  as  aesignature;  in  a  more  limited  way  as  an 
accidental. 

It  undoubtedly  does  appear  to  the  superficial  observer  as 
if  the  accidental  belongs  to  the  note  before  which  it  is  placed, 
and  as  if  the  natural  does  something  in  the  way  of  canceling 
or  restoring  which  the  other  characters  do  not — that  the 
boundary  of  the  staff  is  a  line,  etc.  But  in  all  these  cases  a 
little  investigation  will  show  that  the  truth  is  not  in  the 
appearance. 

These  remarks  are  not  intended  to  imply  that  all  who 
take  the  apparent  for  real  truths  are  poor  musicians  (see 
Preface),  but  it  is  certain  that  they  would  be  better  teachers 
of  the  science  of  music  if  they  would  take  the  trouble  to 
look  into  these  matters  and  right  themselves  where  they 
are  wrong. 


OF  THE  TONALITY  OF  CHROMATIC  TONES. 


97 


No.  38.  OF  THE  TONALITY  OF  CHROMATIC  TONES. 


For  our  closing  chapter  we  can  not  do  better  than  to  quote  from  recent 
editorials  in  The  Musical  Visitor  on  the  above-named  subject. 

The  discussion  began  by  a  correspondent,  who,  in  answer  to  some  state¬ 
ment  that  had  been  made,  said:  The  student  was  right.  The  chromatic 

scale  has  no  tonality.  Its  notation  is  a  matter  upon  which  very  few  authori¬ 
ties  agree.”  The  discussion  then  went  on  as  shown  by  the  larger  and  smaller 
type  in  what  follows: 


CCORDING  to  a  standard  writer,  tonality  has  reference 


iV  to  the  relationship  of  tones  in  a  key,  and  to  the  recog¬ 
nition  by  the  ear  of  the  keytone.  He  says  of  a  series  of 
modulations:  “The  tonality  in  the  first  is  that  of  the  key 
of  G  major;  the  tonality  in  the  second  is  that  of  E  minor,” 
etc.  He  might  as  well  have  said:  “The  first  modulation  is 
in  the  key  of  G  major,  the  second  in  E  minor,”  etc. ;  for  that 
was  plainly  all  that  was  meant.  But  that  being  the  meaning 
of  “tonality,”  it  must  include  the  relationship  to  each  other 
of  all  the  tones  of  the  phrase  or  piece  having  tonality.  Now, 
while  a  chromatic  tone  can  not  be  a  keytone,  it  can  have  a 
well-defined  relationship  in  a  key,  for  every  key  consists  of 
regular  members  called  diatonic  tones,  and  occasional  or 
temporary  members  called  chromatic  tones.  Sharp-four  and 
flat-seven  are  as  well-defined  members  of  a  key  when  they 
are  used  in  it,  as  four  or  seven,  and  their  relationship  to  other 
tones  as  readily  recognized,  and  the  diatonic  and  chromatic 
tones  of  a  key  when  given  in  scale-form — making  the  chro¬ 
matic  scale — lead  from  keytone  to  keytone  (one  to  eight, 
or  vice  versa)  as  surely  as  do  the  tones  of  the  diatonic  scale. 

Therefore  if  “tonality”  refers  to  what  belongs  to  a  key 
it  must  include  the  occasional  chromatic  tones  used  in  it,  as 
well  as  its  chromatic  scale,  for  every  key  has  its  chromatic 
as  well  as  its  diatonic  scale. 


98 


don’t. 


> ) 


This  is  a  matter  upon  whicli  we  must  “agree  to  differ.”  Whilst  it  must 
be  admitted  that  chromatics  may  be  used  without  quitting  the  key — as,  for 
example: 


yet  the  samples  you  quote,  sharp  four  and  flat  seven,  will  almost  invariably 
lead  to  the  keys  of  the  dominant  and  subdominant,  respectively.  The  pro¬ 
gression  then  becomes  one  of  modulation,  and  we  lose,  for  a  time  at  least,  the 
original  tonality.  The  proof  of  this  lies  in  the  harmonization  of  the  chromatic 
scale,  so  called,  for  it  is  impossible  to  keep  in  the  same  key  for  more  than  two 
notes  in  succession.  How  can  there  be  “  tonality”  in  such  a  series  of  sounds? 
The  diatonic  scales,  on  the  contrary,  can  be  harmonized  throughout  without 
the  introduction  of  a  single  accidental  (for  the  raised  seventh  irt  the  minor  is 
essential  to  the  scale,  although  it  does  not  appear  in  the  signature,  and  the 
same  may  be  said  of  the  raised  sixth  and  seventh  in  the  melodic  minor),  and 
thus  the  original  “tonic  ”  is  never  lost  sight  of. 

The  occasional  introduction  of  chromatics  in  the  course  of  a  composition  is 
not  the  question  at  issue,  for  these  may  or  may  not  imply  a  change  of  tonality, 
as  explained  above. 

We  must  take  the  entire  chromatic  scale  and  harmonize  it,  and  as  this  can 
not  be  done  without  incessant  modulation  from  key  to  key,  1  think  it  must  be 
admitted  that  the  scale,  as  a  whole,  has  no  tonality.  In  a  clever  but  little- 
known  treatise*  the  position  is  thus  clearly  stated: 

“The  name  (chromatic  scale)  maybe  conveniently  retained;  but  what  is 
so  called,  etymology  notwithstanding,  is  not  a  scale,  in  the  technical  sense 
of  that  word;  for  a  scale  implies  a  given  key,  but  the  chromatic  progression, 
founded  on  the  chain-cadence,  is  composed  of  a  series  of  changes  from  one 
key  to  another.  *  “  Of  course,  by  borrowing  and  interpolating  accidentals 
from  other  keys,  we  can  obtain  as  many  flats  or  sharps  as  we  please;  but  they 
are  not  rightfully  come  by.  We  borrow  after  the  manner  of  the  Israelites  when 
leaving  Egypt. 


*  The  Genesis  of  Harmony,  by  Hugh  Carleton.  Angener  &  Co. 


OF  THE  TONALITY  OF  CHROMATIC  TONES. 


99 


The  question  at  issue  is  not  whether  the  diatonic  tones  of 
a  key — one,  two,  three,  four,  five,  six  and  seven,  have  tonal¬ 
ity,  but  whether  chromatic  tones,  when  introduced  into  a 
piece  of  music,  have  that  place  and  recognized  relationship 
in  the  key  which  brings  them  properly  under  that  head. 

This  being  the  case,  when  F-sharp  and^B-flat  are  so  used 
in  the  key  of  C  that  they  lead,  the  one  to  the  key  of  G,  and  the 
otherTo  the  key  of  F,  they  are  not  in  the  discussion,  for  then 
they  are  not  chromatic  tones  —  they  are  diatonic  tones  of 
those  neighboring  keys.  F-sharp  is  seven  in  the  key  of  G, 
and  B-flat  is  four  in  the  key  of  F.  A  modulation  in  each 
case  has  taken  place,  and,  we  might  say  in  passing,  if  ''we 
lose  for  a  time  the  original  tonality  ”  we  find  it  in  the  keys 
to  which  we  go.  Tonality  is  not  confined  to  one  key;  it 
changes  with  every  modulation,  and  exists  wherever  a  key 
is  manifested,  however  short  the  manifestation  or  modula¬ 
tion. 

It  is  only  when  tones  not  belonging  regularly  to  a  key 
are  so  used  that  they  do  not  cause  a  change  of  key  that  they 
are  chromatic  tones. 


In  the  above  example  F-sharp  is  sharp  four.  It  and  all 
the  other  visitors  are  here  chromatic  tones,  for  they  cause  no 
change  of  key  or  modulation.  But  notice:  each  has'not  only 
its  name  and  place  in  the  hey,  but  its  character  and  relation¬ 
ship  are  as  well  defined  to  the  musician’s  mind  as  are  those 
qualities  in  its  diatonic  neighbors. 


lOO 


don’t.” 


What  musician  does  not  recognize  and  feel  the  relation¬ 
ship  and  effects  of  the  sharp-four  and  sharp-two  near  the  be¬ 
ginning,  and,  later,  those  of  the  sharp-one,  sharp-six,  and 
sharp-two,  and  last,  that  of  the  beautiful  flat-six,  all  produc¬ 
ing  a  richness  and  variety  in  the  harmony  not  obtainable  by 
diatonic  tones  alone 

Seeing  that  to  be  true,  and  that  musicians  have  given  key¬ 
names  to  these  desirable  visitors,  who  can  doubt  that  they 
are  members  of  the  family  while  in  use,  and,  as  such,  have 
tonality  ? 

That  tones,  both  diatonic  and  chromatic,  have  tendencies 
in  their  progression  is  plain.  Seven  naturally  leads  to  eight, 
four  to  three,  sharp-four  to  five,  (or,  in  a  modulation  the 
same  tones  might  be  seven  to  eight),  etc.  But  while  some 
of  the  diatonic  members  of  a  key  have  considerable  repose 
(the  keytone  complete  repose),  chromatic  tones  have  none. 
They  must  move.  Their  tendency  is  toward  a  tone  of  some 
repose  or  through  a  series  to  the  keytone.  But  as  passing 
tones,  each  has  its  key-name,  its  key  relationship,  and  its 
musical  effect  perfectly  recognized  by  the  musician.  This 
is  illustrated  by  the  following  series — to  the  musician’s  ear 
unmistakably  in  the  key  of  C: 


OF  THE  TONALITY  OF  CHROMATIC  TONES. 


lOI 


The  foregoing  is  the  chromatic  scale  ascending,  but  harmo¬ 
nize  these  tones  and  they  are  out  of  the  discussion,  for  the 
chromatic  scale  at  once  disappears.  In  its  place  is  a  series 
of  short  modulations,  in  which  there  is  not  a  chromatic  tone. 
All  are  regular  members  in  good  standing  of  the  keys  they 
represent. 


The  chromatic  scale,  as  such,  can  not  be  harmonized,  but 
as  every  [tone  in  music  may  be  used  diatonically  or  chromat¬ 
ically,  tones  that  were  chromatic  in  the  chromatic  scale 
may  become  diatonic  by  a  different  treatment.  Although 
this  point  is  out  of  the  discussion,  we  will  say,  in  passing,  that 
the  tonality  of  the  first  chord  is  that  of  C  major,  the  next 
two  give  us  D  major,  the  next  two  E  major,  the  next  two  F, 
the  next  two  G,  the  next  two  A,  the  next  two  B,  and  the 
last  two  C,  the  starting  point. 

.  The  question  is  asked:  ''How  can  there  be  tonality  in 
such  a  series  of  sounds?”  The  answer  is:  There  is  tonal¬ 
ity  wherever  key  relationship  is  felt  and  a  keytone  recog¬ 
nized,  however  short  the  phrase  or  modulation.  The 
dominant  and  tonic  chords  of  any  key  given  in  that  order 


102 


‘‘don’t.”- 


are  sufficient  to  establish  that  key  in  the  mind,  all  the  more 
strongly  if  the  first  chord  is  the  dominant  seventh  chord,  as 
in  the  foregoing  modulations. 

*We  do  not  feel  called  upon  to  criticise  here  such  expres¬ 
sions  as  ‘'keys  of  the  dominant  and  subdominant,”  “raised 
sixth  and  seventh,”  and  “accidentals  from  other  keys,”  but 
they  are  open  to  criticism. 


*  Comments  upon  such  expressions  may  be  found  in  other  parts  of  this  book. 


INDEX. 


♦ 


Accidental,  . . 64 

Augmented  Prime, . 69 

Beats  and  Measures, . 24 

Cancel, . 3^,  94 

Central  Key, . 83 

Chromatic  Alteration, . 64 

Clef, . i . 72 

Degrees,  . 22 

Double  Sharp  and  Double  Flat 
and  their  following  characters,  77 

F-sharp  on  F, . 52 

Intermediate  Tones, . 53 

Intervals, . .  •  *34 

Key  and  Mode, . 57 

Key  and  Scale, . 27 

Key  Group, . 83 

Keytone,  . 74 

Klang, . 83 

Measure  and  Time, . 60 

Measure  Sign, . 59 

Mental  Effects  of  Tones, . 75 

Metre  and  Measure, . 58 


Minor  Second, . . . 09 

Natural  and  Cancel, . 38,  94 

One  Key  and  Two  Modes, . 33 

On  Representing  Keys, . 74 

Pitch  names, . 16 

Pitch  Representation,  . 51 

Pulse, . 76 

Raising  a  Tone, . 66 

Sharp  and  Flat, . 51 

Sharped  and  Flatted, . 61 

Signature, . 45 

Signature  in  Minor  Keys, . 50 

Staff  and  Pitch  Names, . 16 

Technical  Terms, . 67 

The  Staff, . 7,  88 

Tenor  Clef, . 73 

Tonality,  . 67,  97 

Tone  and  Note, . 30 

Tone,  Interval,  and  Number,  . .  .54 

Transposition, . 73 

What  the  Natural  Does, . 50 


(«03) 


UNIVERSrTY  OF  ILLINOIS-URBAN  A 


3  0112  062285827 


■  ■  -T 

sr'f. 


